If your team were in the World Cup final who would you NOT want to be the referee?

First topic message reminder :

If your team were in the Final who'd you NOT want to be referee if the opposition was let's say the All Blacks. If your from new Zealand let's say Australia are the other finalist.

Started doing some research on this then found...
http://redstagrugby.blogspot.com/2011/04/world-cup-referee-panel-2011.html

I can only assume this is our one and only Red Stag, give it a look, very comprehensive info here.

Who would you not want to have as ref?

B91212 wrote:I also think Joubert is currently up there with the best.

He does have 0% of the vote so far so he is doing pretty well 8)

I don't think speaking in two different languages to two different teams is or should be an issue. Seems sensible to me if all refs could do it it would be brilliant.

Steve Walsh. His handling of the Brumbies v Waratahs game and subsequent removal from duties for the next week's match demonstrates he still doesn't have the requisite character or ability to operate at the top level.

johnpartle wrote:Steve Walsh. His handling of the Brumbies v Waratahs game and subsequent removal from duties for the next week's match demonstrates he still doesn't have the requisite character or ability to operate at the top level.

You mean last season? Dickinson's the only SXV ref to be stood down this year - ironically because he replaced Walsh for a match when Walsh was injured.

dont get those arguments about Poite and Rolland:
- ok Poite will always favour the strong scrum but at least it's clear and simple since the start and the kind of lottery you get with most of the other refs (clancy to name one)
- As for Rolland to be biaised when he refs France: please provide a few examples to support this theory.
generally dont like SH refs specially around the ruck, doesnt suit us French as we often get penalised, but not complaining when it happens as such thing as a perfect refereing does not exist.

I agree on Poite. I voted for him only because I think he'd crucify us at scrum time, not because he's a bad ref. With most refs it's a lottery, with Poite the stronger scrum will extract full (sometimes too much) advantage.

Personally I rate him, I just wouldn't want him to be reffing our flimsy scrum in an important match, and I'd far rather we had a clown like Walsh who hasn't the faintest idea of what a proper scrum looks like.

The three things about Poite for me:

- He shows no empathy for the game
- He simply favours the "stronger" scrum
- He has poor communication skills

However he makes few makes from a law point of view and its very hard to actually fault many of his calls outside the scrum. Still don't like him though.

Whocares, you mention Clancy as having a lottery style scrummage. I thought his handling of the France v England scrums was excellent.

Yeah, towards the end of last season. He failed to manage the players effectively and things got Boobie for tat between him and the Brumbies captain (who was also in the wrong).

I haven't seen him ref that many SR matches this season, but I remember the first I saw him take the reigns of at the beginning of the season he looked very off the boil in, and the one he limped off in at half time wasn't much better, though to be fair his replacement was just as bad.

Was far from impressed with him in this year's 6N Scotland v Italy match as well.

Players don't seem to respect him and there is more than a lingering whiff of the attitude that got him in trouble with the Dave Reddin & Shane Horgan incidents bubbling away underneath.

red_stag wrote:The three things about Poite for me:

- He shows no empathy for the game
- He simply favours the "stronger" scrum
- He has poor communication skills

However he makes few makes from a law point of view and its very hard to actually fault many of his calls outside the scrum. Still don't like him though.

Whocares, you mention Clancy as having a lottery style scrummage. I thought his handling of the France v England scrums was excellent.

Excellent, am not sure. overall his performance wasnt too bad but he has been penalising the french scrum a few times (mainly Mas) for not much (think it was because they couldnt bind properly or something - which wasnt clear to me, was in twickenham that day so no much replays); clancy was much worst in the hec SF between saints and perpignan.

as for poite:
- He shows no empathy for the game : he is neutral, fine by me if thats what your mean; a good ref is one you dont tend o notice that much.
- He simply favours the "stronger" scrum : why not? weak scrums tends to find way of cheating by collapsing etc
- He has poor communication skills: he keeps things simple and obviously not as fluent in english as others!

Who, I will certainly agree with you about Perpignan v Saints game.

Re: Poite. As I have said its very hard to fault the guy technically apart from the scrum. But I can't abide his style and thats another issue for me. Its HIS style. There isn't another referee who officiates like that which is not good in terms of having a universal consistent approach. Many if all the other refs did the same I'd have a different view of Poite.

(For what its worth I voted for Bryce Lawrence not Poite anyway)

AlynDavies wrote:Alain Rolland is my favorite referee he's always very, very nice to Wales, but if he's refereeing France then the opposition are always penalised off the park.
Alain Rolland is half French as his father is from that country, he's also fluent in the language. Any time it's a 50/50 decision it will ALWAYS go France's way.
Any normal penalty will result in a Yellow card and any Yellow card will normally be a red. He shouldn't be allowed to referee France as he isn't neutral. You only have to see the tackle by the Namibian player across the shoulder, which was probably a verbal warning yet ended up a straight red in the 18th minute to see the evidence of his decision.

Wayne Barnes is a competent ref also.

One incident is not evidence of a permanent bias. And the other incident of the 1999 World Cup Game of NZ v France was not reffeed by him nor by Wayne Barnes. It was Jim Fleming of Scotland. Where's the evidence of him showing such blatant bias towards France in other matches?

Wayne Barnes went to the bother of learning french to ref matches. Does this mean he's biased as well?

Hahaha, love that Steve Walsh is topping this poll

Seriously though Roman Poite shouldn't be allowed near the world cup, let alone the final.

I think that Poite is quite good apart from how quickly he blows the whistle things that other refs would maybe turn a blind eye to he doesn't and it means the games flow is ruined.

Any reason why people don't like Nigel owens? i think he's pretty good.

Dave Pearson. Hates the welsh and Scots

Ok, whatever about WB and 2007, the AB's lost the match against France in 99 because France played a second half top draw rugby married to fast play down the narrow side with at least 4 runners. That tactical shift was extremely effective. The AB's were beaten. Not robbed or guilty of choking.

As for Poite, do not rate him at all for the mot part. However, with Sky waxing lyical about his supposed wonderful refing of the scrum I find it incredible how the 'Front line' piece consistantly fails to point out the illegality of a loosehead scrumaging in such a fashion as to pop up underneath the opposition hooker's chin. Not square or straight in my book. If allowed to do that, me being a girly winger would be a great prop.

So how this so called expert can be honoured is such a way when he does not see/refuses to whistle such activities is beyond me.

BUT one has to try to be objective, he was spot on with the YC calls in the HC Final. Brave decisions in such a game but he made the right call. That cannot be ignored either. In fact, my objections to him lie mainly in is so called area of expertise. Sometimes he can make very curious calls at the breakdown too.

As for WB, he missed a forward pass that his TJ should have picked up on and that was the real scandel of that decision as in the circumstances that it occured it was said TJ who was in the best position.

Dont liek Steve Walsh, as too often his ego does get in the way but I agree Stag that that is also a strength of Walsh's too. When he has a good game he is good though, Fair, clear and consistant. All one asks for.

Fav ref, Nigel Owens. Funny, clear, allows a contest without it being a free for all and is mostly consistant. Noone is perfect but he tries his best. taht's all we ask of our player sand all we should expect of a ref, who doesnt have 7 angles and slow mo to make a decision with.

He has 3 and three opinions though and the Assistant refs as there are now should be utilised more.

Oh on another note Alun, re use of French etc. Aside from the arrogance of such statements as 'the french should be used to english etc' miscommunication happens the opposite way.

An Aussie TJ calls the attention of the ref to an incident of foul play off the ball regarding contact with the eye or eye area. In very broken English in a cauldron atmosphere the ref asks what happened. TJ explains the incident. Asked for recommendation the TJ replies 'At least a yellow'.

Aside from ambiguity of such a statement, if two Aussies or two French men were having that convo, Buger would have gotten a red card in that match. Berdos, who is a decent ref, at the time clearly had an absolutely abyssmal command of the language. So when I hear Chris White, or George Clancy repeating 'lache lache', I can only imagien that French fans and players alike are thinking the same thing. And it simply isn't good enough. The IRB isn't poor and these refs are paid, so part of their training should be French for the English speakers and English for the French. Would do no harm to have basic Spanish either given Argentina's existance on the world stage and now 4N too.

debaters1 wrote:The IRB isn't poor and these refs are paid

Not the Irish ones. They get a match fee but Rolland, Clancy, Lewis and Fitzgerald (our IRB referees) all have day jobs. They couldn't afford to live on the match fees. As one of them remarked to me its not enough to live on but its the difference between going to the seaside and going abroad for your holidays. Nice to have but you couldn't live on it.

Also that doesn't leave much time for language learning. Why do the English speakers not learn Italian, Spanish, Georgian, Russian, etc?

Stag, I know that. I meant 'we' pay them to do the job (on the day), so the IRB should get them to do it to the best of their ability inc speaking the lingo of both teams. Literally!

I accept the 'where does it end' scenario, but in International rugby at least, the existance of France and Argentina are not a) surprises or b) insurmountable in terms of educating non-French/Spanish speaking refs.

I mean, even paying Roland to give a tutorial on more than just random worls but the explanations that go with them would be a start. He is a fereree so he knows the game/lingo/terminology in both languages and knows what type of questions the captains are likely to ask or the points they are likely to make. I am not looking bor bilingual refs but some specific fluency is acheivable, imho.

Is it not easier for players to learn one language rather than referees learning several. The Italians play in the Magners League, Heineken and Amlin Cups, 6 Nations and World Cups.

Why not Italian?

Fair enough Stag, I take your point, but Berdos under the staus quo, Burger still remains on the field of play, after gounging someone. If the IRB had insisted on better English for him (and lawerence been less idiomatic with his phrasing) then the right decision would have been made on the day.

You said yourself, you're ability to speak German made it easier for you while refing in Germany, and presumably for the players you were officiating over too. Stands to reason that the same would be achieved at the top of the game too.

And while different Leagues and Unions exist, there is far less of the peeing contest that soccer engages in between UEFA and FIFA et al, so if the IRB have the will to do something about referee education in this regard, then it would doubtless be supported and effected properly. Not going to happen for this RWC but for 2015, I could see it being done. And Including Italian would also be possible, beyond single word 'knowedge' such as 'release' or 'roll away'.

Put it this way, if for some reason the prevailing language of rugby were french, we'd all be moaning about the disadvantage on these boards. Not unjustly either.

We need to be practical. I have found being able to speak in the players language makes it easier. Equally the players speaking my language will do the same.

When this argument crops up I always feel there is some kind of positive discrimination at stake. Its a crazy idea for me to have referees having to be able to officiate in 4 languages (English, Spanish, Italian and Argentinian).

French is no more important than Italian or Spanish. When a World Cup rolls around you'll have the Japanese or Russians asking why referees can't use their language.

If a referee happens to speak a second language or can an aptitude for languages thats great. But you will alienate some excellent referees if you force it upon them.

The more practical solution is referees to have recognised phraseology that all players learn.

Voted for Barnes, but then realised that idiot Clancy was there. Can I change - Clancy is a total numpty heid who hates everything Scottish!

Should have added that Barnes and Clancy both look like idiots too !