How to improve Super Rugby refereeing
Roar Guru By Rickety Knees, 7 May 2012 Rickety Knees is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Jaco Peyper, Lyndon Bray, Marius Jonker, Rugby Union, SANZAR, Super Rugby
Related coverage
There has been much public debate about the recent referee howlers by Jaco Peyper (Waratahs v Reds) and Marius Jonker (Brumbies v Bulls). Referee boss Lyndon Bray has publicly called these howlers into question.
But what has that achieved? Nothing.
Both teams missed out on deserved points and the Australian Conference is being criticised for its below par performance when compared to the other Conferences.
With the comprehensive amount of technology now covering each game, it is time to look at how this technology can be used to provide a solution to eliminate these howlers.
Cricket has been able to successfully address this issue with the teams being able to query umpiring decisions to the third umpire for review and the possibility of a decision reversal.
Each captain has two referrals for each innings. The referrals are lost when the umpire’s decision is proven to be correct. Could this not also work for Super Rugby?
Super Rugby could do something similar by providing captains with one referee decision referral each game. The referral would be limited to the scoring/not scoring of a try.
The tricky part is to determine what can be challenged and how many phases can be reviewed.
As a suggestion the referral would be restricted only to the phase leading to the try being scored/not scored using the following guidelines:
Firstly, whether the try has been correctly scored (i.e. where a referee misses a blatant knock in the scoring of a try).
Secondly, where a technical foul has been overlooked (for example Jonker’s howler in the Bulls v Brumbies) and finally where an incorrect decision has been made in not awarding a try (see Peyper’s howler in the Waratahs v Reds match).
Feedback is that cricket umpires are happy working with the referral system as it now takes the dismissal decisions to a point close to 99 percent accuracy and has eliminated umpire howlers from the game.
Is it not time that Super Rugby took steps to eliminate refereeing howlers and introduce a try/no try referral system?
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- Jaco Peyper, Lyndon Bray, Marius Jonker, Rugby Union, SANZAR, Super Rugby
May 7th 2012 @ 7:54am
sixo_clock said | May 7th 2012 @ 7:54am | Report comment
Hi RK,
The frustration out there and in the Roar is strong. Neutral refs, errors correction, the perfect game. If we could use technology somehow it would be a bonus. I often wondered about giving the ARs a whistle. Then again we all notice that they are almost apologetic, deferent when dealing with the game ref, even the bigger egos seem at best to manage only a whisper when giving their advice. Within the ranks of the refs they are firmly of the belief that whoever gets the whistle is very much on his own. Jottings recently provided us with the history of referral leaving most decisions to the two captains. We won’t be going back to that level of integrity soon which could be an opportunity.
In point of fact that now that we have the camera angles and the seeming accuracy of replays is it an opportunity to revert back to the original spirit of the game. Creating an environment where honesty amongst equals is the principle object of the game. Rugby would create a storm of interest because the ability of players on both sides to stand up a particularly intense period of play and agree that the opponents did ground the ball, no knock-on occurred etc etc.
A ref will still be required but on the sidelines. The question is would the modern emphasis on winning be able to cope with these truth sessions. On the other hand how much game time will be spent with captains deciding what happened and what to do about it. What would we do then when the captains made a mistake and the replays showed differently!
Just flying a kite here, pretty outlandish idea I know. Still, it would be very very interesting and separate our game from all the others where ref-disenchantment spoils the party.
May 7th 2012 @ 8:13am
Rickety Knees said | May 7th 2012 @ 8:13am | Report comment
Agree 6′O – it would not be easy to implement. I really like your point “it would be very very interesting and separate our game from all the others where ref-disenchantment spoils the part”.
May 7th 2012 @ 8:45am
Happy Hooker said | May 7th 2012 @ 8:45am | Report comment
I have watched the Morne Steyn “knock-on” over and over, and am not convinced it was a knock on. Did the ball travel forward from his hands towards the ground? There is no guarantee a TMO would have come to a different conclusion. Just because the players stopped, does that make it a howler?
May 7th 2012 @ 8:52am
Rickety Knees said | May 7th 2012 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Agree that the TMO may have not come up with a different conclusion, however had the matter been dealt with on the field it would not have resulted in the ensuing debate, which has not presented our game in its best light.and left many fans disenchanted.
May 7th 2012 @ 9:13am
Lindommer said | May 7th 2012 @ 9:13am | Report comment
“I have watched the Morne Steyn “knock-on” over and over, and am not convinced it was a knock on. Did the ball travel forward from his hands towards the ground?”
I watched a replay in motion and it was a knock-on for me.
HH brings up an interesting point here over which I’ve often pondered. A ball may hit a player’s outstretched hands and then fall BEHIND the vertical to the ground, ie. not towards the opponents’ goal-line. However, these would be very rare instances as players running forward at speed, as Steyn was, invariably propel the ball forward as they touch it, making it a knock-on. I imagine referees would have some difficulty carrying a piece of string with a bricky’s plumb weight to ascertain the line of fall; they’d have to call a halt in play to determine the exact spot the ball touched the player as well as the exact spot where the ball hit the ground. In the interests of accuracy I feel the various referees’ associations should make arrangements with their local Bunnings to have all refs issued with string and weight. We also need eagle-eyed video operators who can assist refs to determine the exact spot where he should hang his string. The VO’s assistant could then simultaneously mark the spot where the ball touched the ground and, with a tape measure, declare it back, or not. I could confidently say about 0.05% in cases when the ball fell in front of a player would be found to have been inaccurately adjudicated.
When I did my initial referee’s course this possibility was touched upon; the wise convenor suggested ALL instances of the ball going down in front of a moving player should be called knock-ons. I’m still perplexed why the three officials at Loftus didn’t see it that way.
May 8th 2012 @ 9:08am
Happy Hooker said | May 8th 2012 @ 9:08am | Report comment
Just put it down to the Parallex error (an old favourite of Rex “Moose” Mossop).
May 7th 2012 @ 1:17pm
Marshall Brentnall said | May 7th 2012 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
I think you only have to look at the players reaction to the ‘knock on’ as there was effectively a stoppage in play, before the ref called knocked backwards. When half the attacking and defending team stop, expecting a knock on call, you have to think it was a knock on. You win some and lose some I guess…….
May 7th 2012 @ 9:13am
Grimmace said | May 7th 2012 @ 9:13am | Report comment
I don’t believe technology would solve all the problems, although it would be a great help. I think refs need to remember that there is 30 players and 1000′s of fans at the ground and on TV that dererve a good refereeing performance. It isn’t just about them The 6 points the Crusaders scored in the 1st half had even Justin Marshall calling into question why the penalties were given.
Refs can change for the better with a change in attitude. Steve Walsh seems to have dropepd his ego and improved the on field performance at the same time.
May 7th 2012 @ 9:18am
Rickety Knees said | May 7th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
Good point Grimmace – there was a time when referees were instructed to be the 31st player, keep the game flowing and the job was done if no one commented about the referee at the end of the match.
May 7th 2012 @ 2:43pm
tubby said | May 7th 2012 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
i think walsh deserved a lot of praise for his handling of the game this week. Telling the captains he doesn’t want to be the central figure so they need to clean up the breakdown, and the game did indeed flow better under that style of management.
May 7th 2012 @ 9:26am
Garryown said | May 7th 2012 @ 9:26am | Report comment
Having just read and seen a photograph of Brussow’s hand over Nalaga’s face in the region of his eyes {Cheetah’s vs Force] and questions over Ferreira treatment of Hodgson with no hint of yellow cards, one asks the question are SA refs going to ref this way whenever an Australian team plays in SA because of the hysteria that followed SA’s loss in the World Cup to Australia. Some notable SA rugby personalities were part of it ; Andree Watson being one.Bray should be sorting this out quickly.
May 7th 2012 @ 9:35am
Rickety Knees said | May 7th 2012 @ 9:35am | Report comment
The solution is neutral referees.
May 7th 2012 @ 10:20am
ohtani's jacket said | May 7th 2012 @ 10:20am | Report comment
But the refereeing from neutral refs has been poor as well.
May 7th 2012 @ 10:24am
Rickety Knees said | May 7th 2012 @ 10:24am | Report comment
No argument with that OJ but it takes any perceived bias argument out the equation.
May 7th 2012 @ 10:29am
ohtani's jacket said | May 7th 2012 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Maybe, but if Bryce referees a Reds/Waratahs fixture instead is anyone going to be any happier? The trouble seems to be with the referees group as a whole, IMO. I do think however that sides like the Crusaders and Reds who contest the ruck area so often ought to live by the sword and die by the sword.
May 7th 2012 @ 11:16am
nickoldschool said | May 7th 2012 @ 11:16am | Report comment
Am with you and Stillmatic, OJ.
Re- the Tahs v Reds example you give, am sure the same who call for a “neutral ref” would look at ref’s allegiance, state of birth etc and say he might be biased too. Its an endless story. Stillmatic is spot on when he tells RK “it is his own perception’. Since when should we change rules because “it takes any perceived bias argument out the equation”???
How about teams’ colors?!! There are some studies showing refs may be biased in favor of athletes/teams wearing red, that teams wearing blacks are more penalised etc… So if we follow some Roarers assumptions than refs are biased, their “bad calls” may actually be more influenced by teams colors than their nationality, no!!!!??
http://www.psych.cornell.edu/sec/pubPeople/tdg1/Frank%20&%20Gilo%2088.pdf
May 8th 2012 @ 9:15am
Happy Hooker said | May 8th 2012 @ 9:15am | Report comment
And what about pants man “Aussie” Steve Walsh? What determines neutrality? Is he considered Aussie or Kiwi. Could he referee all matches except an African team against a non-African team?
May 7th 2012 @ 10:37am
stillmatic1 said | May 7th 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
the perception is yours though, rickety. and the referees boss isnt responsible for each and everyones perception, now is he? its a bit like saying all rugby followers who watch fox sports want financial advice from MLC. the perception from advertisers is that upper middle class australians watch rugby on fox sports, which may not be true at all.
cant claim to be professional if we start talking about someone elses “perception” in regards to appointments.
i agree with the article in respect to technology. we must grow up and try to give the ref as much on field help as is necessary to reduce the game changing blunders. the technology is available, so lets break out of this amateur idea of “the ref is always right, he is god” when millions of people can see that he/she isnt.
May 7th 2012 @ 12:26pm
Jimbo Jones said | May 7th 2012 @ 12:26pm | Report comment
Perhaps we need colour blind refs, not neutral refs?
May 7th 2012 @ 4:45pm
sittingbison said | May 7th 2012 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
THEY ARE ALREADY BLIND….
May 7th 2012 @ 11:42pm
Blue Blood said | May 7th 2012 @ 11:42pm | Report comment
I’m glad someone brought up the Force. Their treatment by the refs this weekend was jaw dropping.
May 7th 2012 @ 10:45am
Brett McKay said | May 7th 2012 @ 10:45am | Report comment
Rickety, I’m not sure about referrals in rugby. We already see now in the NRL where refs will rule on things differently at one of the field to the other, just because at one end it can be checked by video.
Likewise, you wouldn’t want a situation where a teams refers something that happened 5 minutes and 15 phases ago 70m back behind play.
No question the ARs need to be providing more input to the man in the middle, and there’s even less question that there shouldn’t be as big a gulf between the Jouberts and the Lawrences at the top level.
But I’m not convinced that technology is the silver bullet..
May 7th 2012 @ 10:53am
Rickety Knees said | May 7th 2012 @ 10:53am | Report comment
Cheers Mate,
“As a suggestion the referral would be restricted only to the phase leading to the try being scored/not scored”.
No argument the AR’s need to be much more invloved – however how all three missed Steyne’s knock on is beyond me.
May 7th 2012 @ 10:54am
Moaman said | May 7th 2012 @ 10:54am | Report comment
Simplify the laws of the game-it’s that easy! Make the Refs’ jobs easier to do.Installing ‘neutral’ refs doesn’t solve the problem…it can remove accusations of bias due to nationality but what about corruption?? That will be the next whinge.Bryce Lawrence was neutral in the RWC semi—so he gets accused of trying to manipulate the draw FFS!
May 7th 2012 @ 11:00am
Tarragon Fields said | May 7th 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
How about they trial a two referee system? There are already two refs at the games anyway (one in case the initial ref is sick).
May 7th 2012 @ 2:16pm
The Great G Nepia said | May 7th 2012 @ 2:16pm | Report comment
Are you serious Tarragon Fields?? One of those critters is enough, why would I want to have two of them ruining the game two-fold?
May 7th 2012 @ 2:51pm
Tarragon Fields said | May 7th 2012 @ 2:51pm | Report comment
Yeah I think it’s worth a try. I don’t seem to hear the same burning hatred of referees in league.
May 7th 2012 @ 9:10pm
Damo said | May 7th 2012 @ 9:10pm | Report comment
League has a fraction of the laws that rule rugby. League is a simpler game.
As Roy Masters said ‘it is like comparing checkers and chess.’
May 7th 2012 @ 2:15pm
The Great G Nepia said | May 7th 2012 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
The best way to improve Super rugby referring is to send an internal memo to all refs in big bold font saying “Stop Running Around and Refereeing the game as if you have carrots up your collective a#&es”
May 7th 2012 @ 2:42pm
Moaman said | May 7th 2012 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
In Bryce Lawrences case………..;-)
May 7th 2012 @ 2:27pm
The Great G Nepia said | May 7th 2012 @ 2:27pm | Report comment
Another option is to clone Steve Walsh and exhume Clive Norling.
May 7th 2012 @ 3:43pm
Rickety Knees said | May 7th 2012 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Still believe that Bray should be drilling the 31st player mantra into the referees and have those doing the assessing/ referee feedback focussing on that.
May 8th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Happy Hooker said | May 8th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
An unfortunate choice of words RIckety viz a viz Lyndon.