Reports say referee Marks sacked after controversy
By AAP, 11 Mar 2010 AAP is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- NSW Waratahs, paul marks, Rugby Union, SANZAR, Super Rugby
Australian rugby Referee Paul Marks has paid the price for his controversial decision not to award the Sharks a penalty try in the final minutes of their Super 14 loss to NSW last Saturday night.
The Australian newspaper has reported that Marks has been sacked indefinitely, with SANZAR referees boss Lyndon Bray conceding a penalty try against Waratah Kurtley Beale should have been awarded to the visiting South African side.
The decision to stand down Marks comes after Sharks coach John Plumtree and his players voiced their dismay at the officiating after their 25-21 loss to NSW, their fourth successive loss of 2010.
© AAP 2012Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A (2)
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (7)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (202)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
- NSW Waratahs, paul marks, Rugby Union, SANZAR, Super Rugby
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:27am | Report comment
I wonder what others think that in instances like this that the win / loss is voided and a draw is awarded. Lyndon Bray has admitted that a penalty try should have been awarded and therefore the Sharks should have won.
It would be a big call to make but surely it is the right thing to do
pothale said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:45am | Report comment
Nope, I don’t agree.
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:52am | Report comment
But why don’t you agree,
Wavell and I have talked about this on another thread, I’m of no firm stance on the situation I was merely asking what others think
CraigB said | March 11th 2010 @ 11:41am | Report comment
disagree because the tahs were not at fault so why should they be punished. Lifes not fair so why should sport be any different. If you need to rely of perfect refreeing to win then you have bigger problems.
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
Craig noone said it was the Tahs fault now did they well I certainly didn’t.
However Bray and Co seem to think the Tahs did something illegal hence why they believe a penalty try should have been awarded. The Sharks did nothing wrong here either CraigB and it pays to remember that.
What I was saying is why should they also be punished for the incompetent display of Marks. Would it be easier to keep the peace and say hey guys we all know Marks had a bad game and his decision did impact the final scoreline so maybe lets call it a draw.
It wasn’t like this was a small error by marks it was monumental.
I think sometimes Craig you also need to look at it from the Sharks point of view also they feel robbed and rightfully so, the Tahs will feel lucky yes and I don’t know if many deep down believe they should have won that game especially after reading some of the threads of late
MarkR said | March 12th 2010 @ 3:26pm | Report comment
Ora, problem with this is where do you draw the line, what about internationals, what about games early in the round where differnent interpretations were played. I think it’s a very very bad idea.
The game is played under a ref, 2 touchies, & a TMO. Sometimes they will make mistakes as they’re human, supporters just need to suck it up.
New Reds Recruit said | March 11th 2010 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Totally agree, there should be some recourse for dodgy decisions. However I also feel that in cases like this the ref should be able to make use of the TMO to reach the decision.
AndyS said | March 11th 2010 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
And ask him what – “Matt, can you please advise whether black 8 would have definitely caught that pass, so that he would have probably scored the try”?
You have to be able to ask a question that has a definitive answer.
terrykidd said | March 11th 2010 @ 6:06am | Report comment
I don’t agree either because in this case there is doubt that Beale deliberately batted the ball away. The ball went upwards and sideways which at least raises the issue that he may have been attempting an intercept, if so then no penalty try.
It is a dumb rule and it asks too much of a referee to make such a split decision. The results of games should not be overturned based on such a stupid, dumb rule.
Besides the Sharks didn’t do enough to deserve to win.
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 6:28am | Report comment
You could argue that fact all day i’m not disputing it either.
However the panel has ruled it should have been a penalty try so what should the next step have been?
I’m with you Terry that he may have been going for an intercept, however the fact remains the panel has deemed it should have been a penalty try, they are not disputing that. What I am asking based on this call from the powers that be should the game be awarded a draw?
I’m neither here nor there but that ruling does raise the next obvious question should it be ruled a draw as this incident happened towards the end of the game and should he have scored it would have totally flipped the result on its head. What Bray and co are saying is yes we agree with you (Plumtree / Sharks supporters) but nothing will change.
By admitting that it should have been a penalty try SANZAR is admitting the Sharks should have won the game, like I continue to say I’m neither here nor there but surely this highlights another problem and as Wavell said maybe games should be looked at a case by case basis. It is a hard call to make as it could set a dangerous precedence.
Fuchal said | March 11th 2010 @ 7:54am | Report comment
SANZAR are not ruling that the Sharks should have won the game because a penalty try should have been awarded. You are drawing an incorrect conclusion on one statement they’ve made. And the statement they’ve made is an academic statement based on theoretics.
Conversely you could argue that the Waratahs would have won if a penalty try was awarded to the Sharks, as there was still several minutes to play at that point. Theoretically they could have scored from the restart kick off. In fact, there are a number of theoretics which come into play when you play the “what if” game. And that is all you are doing when you claim that the game should be decided by a judiciary after the fact.
Personally I think that the system for holding referees to account needs to be given less public scrutiny by players and coaches. There are perfectly good systems in place by the referees associations for evaluating and improving referees’ performances, and for using these to plan who to appoint for future matches.
What SANZAR has done in this instance, and by allowing the Sharks staff and players to carry on like pestilent children, is to hang a referee out to dry. No wonder rugby associations are having a difficult time recruiting new referees, when potential refs see the lynching given to those already in the position.
D
Tragic said | March 11th 2010 @ 8:25am | Report comment
Well said Fuchal.
This seems to be a flawed method for dealing with situations like these. And an absence of process. A poor exercise of appeasement
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 8:53am | Report comment
How is it drawing an incorrect conclusion, sanzar is saying a penalty try should have been awarded. had it the sharks would have likely gone on to win the game although there is a chance the Tahs may have scored again.
But before you fly off on your high horse what i have been saying with SANZAR openly coming out and stating that it should have been a penalty try it opens up the result to a myriad of questions and debate and i am only highlighting some. Like I said I’m neither here nor there on what the result should be but it’s blatantly clear that Lyndon Bray are adamant a try should have been awarded, the Sharks eventually lost the game by four points did they not? Should the penalty try been awarded the conversion is a near certainty, which technically would have put them 3 pts ahead.
And for your information I am not making any claims so I would stop throwing your ridiculous accusations, what I did was simply ask what others thought and have given some possible reasons as to why justifying it as a draw could be concluded. I’m not here nor there because as Wavell and I have already alluded to on another thread, there is nothing to say that the Tahs wouldn’t have scored again. But there is unquestionable doubt about the final score and that can be clearly seen from the threads of the past week from roarers and now officials alike!
Jimmy said | March 12th 2010 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
Fuchal i see you are picking and choosing what you actually want to cut and paste in this forum,
here’s a quote from Ora in his second post on this thread but it seems you have chosen to ignore this as have a few others funny that. Is it because he has a mind of his own and chooses to challenge the norm.
“Would it be easier to keep the peace and say hey guys we all know Marks had a bad game and his decision did impact the final scoreline so maybe lets call it a draw.”
“with SANZAR openly coming out and stating that it should have been a penalty try it opens up the result to a myriad of questions and debate and i am only highlighting some. Like I said I’m neither here nor there on what the result should be ”
But don’t let that get in the way of your attack, it seems clear to me he’s asking a question
Nashi said | March 11th 2010 @ 6:50am | Report comment
Ora, a game should end when the final whistle blows. Why should the fans wait for a judiciary to make a decision that could take days before they can celebrate a dour win like that…..
Match reviews are for future appearances like citing a player for foul play. Same applies to refs.
I can recall in League where teams can be docked points for having too many players on the field but I don’ think the points were ever awarded to the losing side.
CK said | March 11th 2010 @ 7:22am | Report comment
I don’t agree that a game should be called a draw after the match either. This is the nature of sport; you win some, you lose some, and in many instances the ref may have an influence on that result. And it happens in every sport… just ask Thierry Henry!
In this particular instance, Beale’s hand never moved in a downward motion, so it wasn’t deemed a deliberate knock-down, and the ref made his call. Regardless of what Lyndon Bray has said, the call has been made and you should not be able to go back and reverse the decision.
if you open this can of worms, can you imagine how many teams would appeal against decisions after reviewing the game? I refer you to the semi-final a couple of years back between the Tahs and the Hurricanes; the RSA Ref awarded a penalty to the Hurricanes for NSW collapsing their own feed, centre field from a re-start. That penalty led to points and changed the entire outcome of that game; ulitmately putting the Tah’s out of the final. Can you imagine if they got to contest that afterwards, or the top ref turned and ruled it a draw? What then? For and against for the final or play again?
Nope, not into that concept at all.
Even looser said | March 11th 2010 @ 7:48am | Report comment
Mark’s sacked eh?
Hang on a second. Hasn’t he previously demonstrated that he is not up to refereeing at this level? So who appointed him? Because that’s who needs to be looked at. Never send a boy to do a man’s job.
Or if it’s computers ….never send a man to do a boy’s job.
Ora said | March 11th 2010 @ 9:06am | Report comment
I have raised most of the points you have all been saying as well as stating that declaring a draw could set a dangerous precedence. Lyndon Bray is the boss of the SANZAR refs association so he carries alot more clout and nous than most of us all though we like to think we know more.
I for one am more inclined to go with what Bray and his Merry Men say in this instance re the try, if we did know as much as them why aren’t any of us in their job????
Even Bray has admitted it you could debate it until the cows come home.
In saying that for two long here at the roar we are demanding somone grow some big furries and make decisions. bray has made his decision and said Marks was wrong he also said the result will not change fair enough. But it seems now that someone is making decisions and the big calls it’s still not good enough for some go figure????
Sam said | March 11th 2010 @ 9:25am | Report comment
I don’t agree with changing it to a draw unless there is some form of serious misconduct (ie failed drugs test, bloodgate etc) – but agree that the openness regarding refereeing performances this season are really good. I like to see ref’s and officials admit when mistakes are made – I certainly have a lot of respect when a ref fronts up and says “looking at the replay, I stuffed up” – you can’t ask for more once the mistake has been made. I also think referees are more conscious that poor performances are not going to be tolerated, they are professionals and get paid to perform. I think as long as they are shown respect on the field, and given a fair chance to defend their performances (to their bosses) before public announcements are made then its all good.
Lee said | March 11th 2010 @ 9:38am | Report comment
I don’t understand the whole “his hand wasn’t moving in a downward direction so it can’t be an intentional knock down” arguement. Surely it matters little what direction his hand is moving in and more his intent – yes I know that that is hard to judge but from the replay, he throws his hand wildly at the ball, if he was attempting a catch, it would have been the most miraculous catch I would have ever seen if he was succesful.
I believe the phrase is intentional knock on not an intentional knock down.
TommyM said | March 11th 2010 @ 5:35pm | Report comment
Why would he not try to catch it? He would have scored a runaway try.
ohtani's jacket said | March 11th 2010 @ 9:44am | Report comment
And while we’re at it, award the ’91 World Cup to England.
stillmissit said | March 11th 2010 @ 10:43am | Report comment
Agree that Marks is a poor ref at this level. Do not agree with Lyndon Bray sticking his nose into something like this. I watched the slow motion replay on the Rugby Club last night and for a committee to agree that it was an intentional act is madness and makes me wonder what is going on in the referee organisation.
Bray was a good ref but he is a crap manager. His little outburst to the AB’s about Stuart Dickinson proves he is useless in this position. SACK LYNDON BRAY – before he does more damage.
Why doesn’t this idiot fix up the calls at scrum time (for all refs) so there is some consistency and give us all a break.
Ben C said | March 11th 2010 @ 11:32am | Report comment
Paddy O’Brien is the IRB official who spoke to the AB’s about Dickinson’s performance. Lyndon Bray is the SANZAR not the IRB referee manager.
stillmissit said | March 12th 2010 @ 7:51am | Report comment
Opps! thanks for that Ben C. My memory is a failure at best.
Chris McKay said | March 11th 2010 @ 11:04am | Report comment
I could not disagree more with the decision. Beale’s hand and arm motion was an ‘upward’ movement and was not a direct ‘swat’ of the ball.
To add to this there is absolutely no clear evidence to suggest a try would have been scored.
Lydon Bray has got it wrong this time.
Seiran said | March 12th 2010 @ 4:28am | Report comment
You’re in a one-eyed dream mate, like all the aussie commentators ‘analysing’ the crap out of the incident.
I’m a waratah’s fan through and through and I don’t think there was any way he was going for an intercept. It was a split second reaction to put his hand up for that ball and In don’t think an intercept or knock down was on his mind, just to stop the ball being passed to the clear player.
Imagine if the sharks were the offending side, what would your reaction be then? You’d be up in arms like the sharks fans.
Bray was correct in his decision.