Dropping Steve Walsh opens up other problems

 
Spiro Zavos Columnist

By , 29 Apr 2010 Spiro Zavos is a Roar Expert

Tagged:
 , , ,

88 Have your say

Related coverage



At 9.43 am on Wednesday, a media release from the ARU popped up in my email basket. It read: “Please find attached revised official appointments for Week 12. Changes are: Chris Pollock replaces Steve Walsh as Referee for the Brumbies v Reds match in Canberra. Vinny Munro replaces Chris Pollock as AR1 for Hurricanes v Chiefs match in Wellington.”

Nothing more. No explanation why the changes were made.

Did the ACT Brumbies put strong pressure on SANZAR to drop Walsh?

Was this a decision taken by the referees manager for SANZAR, Lyndon Bray, based on Walsh’s performance in the NSW Waratahs-ACT Brumbies match last weekend?

Or were there other matters that came into consideration?

Some hours later we got answers of sort to these questions. Bray told Radio Sport that Walsh had been dropped or pulled from the Brumbies-Reds match because it was “in the best interests of the game” and not because of his performance in the Waratahs-Brumbies match.

According to Bray, Walsh had an ‘average’ game last weekend.

I believe this is being a bit generous to the referee. Walsh had difficulty setting up the scrums in an effective manner. There were a lot of resets.

The Brumbies felt that their stronger scrum (in their opinion) was being pulled down by the Waratahs front row, especially by Al Baxter, who has a reputation for sinking scrums.

There was an incorrect penalty against the Canberra captain Stephen Hoiles when he continued running after a broken tackle. This incident was right out in the open. It was plain from the way Hoiles spoke to Walsh that he disagreed with the call.

Walsh seemed to resent this comment.

Then there was the decision to disallow a try scored by Adam Ashley-Cooper. Sitting in the media box, in what seemed to be a miles away from the far corner of the field, I wondered how Ashley-Cooper could have made the tryline when he was tackled from so far out.

But replays showed he had performed an astonishing feat of athleticism by tumbling after he was tackled, keep the ball and his knees off the ground, before planting the ball down for a try.

I couldn’t see this from a great distance away, but Walsh, who was not far away from the incident, and certainly the assistant referee who was only metres away, should have seen what happened.

Why didn’t Walsh go to the video referee if he felt that there was doubt about the try?

The argument is made is that the video referee only rules on what happens over the tryline, and this is why he wasn’t called into action.

But this is not strictly accurate.

Video referees are also required to judge whether the ball was placed over the tryline immediately after the tackle.

The former SANZAR boss of referees, Peter Marshall, reckons that Walsh could have asked the video referee whether a try should be awarded or not.

The video referee would have looked at the tackle incident. He would have seen that the ball was not placed twice during the tackle short of the try line, and that Ashley-Cooper’s knees avoided the ground before he actually planted the ball across the try line.

The ruling would have been, or should have been: “You may award a try.”

As the Brumbies were defeated 19-12, who knows what the effect of this might have had on the final outcome?

Walsh is a good referee who does have the occasional bad day. He had a poor game on Saturday night.

For Bray to say that it was ‘average’ was wrong.

But it was also wrong for Matt Giteau to suggest that “I don’t know if we’ll turn up, what’s the point?”

Bray has used this comment and others from the Brumbies camp to argue that “it would be remiss to ignore the sort of environment that is likely to happen if we left Steve refereeing the Brumbies and the Reds.”

What this means, in effect, is that if franchises make it clear they are going to give a particular referee a torrid time because of the way he has refereed, then Bray will pull that referee from refereeing the offended side.

This is a terrible precedent.

To take an example: the Waratahs rarely win when Jonathan Kaplan referees. What would happen if they say “I don’t know if we’ll turn up” if Kaplan is the designated referee for one of their matches?

Would Bray pull Kaplan?

Bray also wants Giteau to face disciplinary committee and be stood down for a week for his comments.

This strikes me as using the old tactic of the Chinese emperors of shooting the messenger bearing bad news.

Bray should take his focus off Giteau.

It was Steve Walsh who put in what I consider was a below-average refereeing performance. Bray’s task is to help Walsh recover the excellent refereeing form he has shown in the past.

Enjoy 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.

Get a daily rugby union email

Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it.

We value privacy. More.