The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Three ways to fix NRL refereeing

Is it a penalty, or is Ashley Klein doing 'the sprinkler'? Ref signals are frequently hard to read. (AAP Image/Action Photographics, Colin Whelan)
Roar Rookie
20th June, 2014
32

Referees. Every round there will come a time when coaches demand their demotions and fans demand their blood. They will never receive sympathy from anyone.

It’s a high pressure job and people get angry because seemingly simple decisions are made wrong. Unfortunately there is no answer. Refereeing is a high pressure job and human error will always play its part, but inconsistency is the current issue.

Three areas in particular are currently officiated poorly and making the game look messier than it needs to be.

Obstruction
Unfortunately obstruction as it currently stands is a flip of the coin. Even commentators don’t know whether we’re going to see a red or green light. There is no consistency whatsoever with the obstruction rule.

It seems this has led to the occurrence of diving. As soon as defensive players are coming into contact near their own try line, there has been a growing tendency for them to go down on first contact with the offense, no matter how hard or impeding the offensive dummy runner is going.

The rule is there and it is necessary for the game, it just needs to be officiated clearly and consistently. I’ve watched plays where I don’t know which player is supposed to have been impeded. As a spectator, I should be able to watch a replay and have a fairly certain idea of whether or not a try is a try.

Currently this is not the case.

If it looks like a defender could have got the attacker, a try is not awarded. It needs to swing back where there is reasonable certainty the defender would have stopped or interfered meaningfully with the attacker. There is too much doubt awarded in favour of the defence.

Advertisement

Stripping
Attacking players in two-man tackles are being rewarded for loose carries. Due to the angles available to on-field refs, it seems a lot of decisions are going in favour of the attacking player when a ball is dropped in a tackle of two or more defenders.

If we can see on our televisions that a refereeing decision was wrong immediately after it happened, then why can’t on-field referees work with video referees so the correct decisions can be made live on the field?

This is where the game needs to bring in more technology. In Origin 2, the ball hit Aaron Woods from the kick-off and it should have been Queensland’s ball with good field position at a crucial point in the game. We could see it immediately after it happened but instead the on-field referees didn’t see it and New South Wales got a penalty and good field position. Not everyone will agree but the game needs to be updated for more technologically savvy audiences.

Tackles
The Alex McKinnon incident was terribly unfortunate but these men are playing contact sports and freak accidents and injuries do occur. Of course dangerous tackles need to be removed from the game but having knee jerk reactions to incidents is not the right way to handle it.

Terrible tragedies happen in contact sports, but those are the risks the people who play them take. We can ban every gang and lifting type tackle there is but nothing will remove the fact that this is a contact sport and things go wrong.

Most people can agree on what constitutes a dangerous tackle yet the penalties awarded to the offenders are varying and inconsistent. This a problem with the judiciary. Josh Reynolds lifting tackle on Brent Tate in Origin 1 looked bad.

It was penalised for being a dangerous tackle. Then it was inexplicably downgraded at the judiciary and Reynolds didn’t even cop a week. Everyone knows that Origin is treated differently but the exact same tackle under different circumstances would not be treated so lightly.

Advertisement

Solution
We need to introduce a challenge option that allows either captains or coaches to have a limited opportunity to challenge a call on-field. Cricket, tennis and the NFL incorporated technological in-game challenges successfully. It would be something at least worth trialing at some point down the line. Currently if players can waste some time on-field and a video replay can be shown at the stadium, the referees can sometimes overturn it. It is inconsistent and confusing.

There needs to be a big brother element involved in decisions. I have heard discussions of a war room where a bunch of officials can make and I believe overturn decisions from upstairs during the game, which is a great idea.

Less mistakes and more consistency is all that is needed. Even if it only makes us complain a little less.

The problem is not actually the referees, it’s the NRL. If they are going to change rules every few rounds then how can we as fans expect consistency? The game the refs are officiating in Round 1, is not the same one being played in Round 26. There can’t be such a swift shift in rules mid-season, it’s jarring for the game. At least wait until an off-season review then introduce new rules at the beginning of seasons – not during them.

Consistency is something that is lacking in general for the NRL. They are quick to change when they are put under pressure. Be it by media, fans, or professionals opinions. There comes a point where they just need to say this is how it’s going to be and stick with it.

Change is inevitable of course. I was watching a late 1990s Origin match on Foxtel the other day and was amazed at just how different the game was. Most visibly the roughness of it. There were elbows in faces, high tackles, and nothing was penalised, it was a rough game.

It was what rugby league was originally built on, and I just hope in the future the NRL won’t strip away everything that has made the game great.

Advertisement
close