I’m aware that the Steve Walsh vs. the Brumbies debacle over the last week has been flogged for all its worth in the media this week. However, the events last Saturday night have raised some interesting questions in my mind over refereeing in the Super 14.
Before going any further, I’d like to disclose my prejudices: I’m a fan of the Brumbies. I may even have hurled some unrepeatable sentences at Steve Walsh from the sidelines during last Saturday’s match.
But I will try to put that aside. And Steve, if you’re reading this, I’m sorry I told you to do that with your whistle.
My first issue is this: Should precedent become law on the rugby field?
With regard to the Adam-Ashley Cooper ‘try’, it is an issue I have been pondering. Not being an expert on the laws of the game, I will assume that Walsh was within his rights to call ‘double movement’, as far as the letter of the law is concerned.
However, I have been watching rugby for a long time.
It is very common to see players powering an extra couple of metres in exactly this fashion, particularly in a pick and drive scenario. I must have seen it hundreds of times in general play, and not once have I seen it penalised.
Given the subjective nature of rugby laws, a far-reaching precedent becomes the ‘law’ as it applies to the game. We have seen this year that different interpretations of the same laws can have drastic consequences on how the game is allowed to be played. The point is, without consistency of these rulings, rugby doesn’t work.
Under this reasoning, Walsh’s decision should be considered incorrect. No argument. No debate. The letter of the law becomes immaterial. Or, are referees within their rights to apply the law more stringently when points are concerned?
Secondly: Should the performance of referees be up for questioning?
I have no argument that on the field, the referee should be considered the absolute power. I also have no issue with the fining of Matt Giteau, who spoke well out of line with his comments this week.
However, team trust and respect for referees should be a legitimate concern to SANZAR. The game cannot exist in good spirit without it.
If a team is legitimately questioning the integrity of a referee (and, on the basis of last Saturday, the Brumbies may have a case), shouldn’t that be a genuine concern?
Teams are allowed to make post-match comments to SANZAR. However, head of SANZAR referees Lyndon Bray made it clear with his comments this week that he was not open to questioning of his referees.
Referees acting as though they are a law unto themselves is helping no-one.
Whilst this may sound a lot like sour grapes, for the first time last Saturday I felt genuinely concerned that a referee was deliberately being unfair. SANZAR should not be sticking its head in the sand. And Matt Giteau should think before he speaks next time.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.
The final result was 4-1 for the Kiwi sides but some of the results could easily have been different with a bit more maturity from the Aussies.
Kurtley Beale will play his first Super Rugby match in 1494 days after being rushed straight into the Western Force's lineup to take on…
After missing out on the title the last two years the Tahs players seem laser focused to win this year.
The Queensland Reds and the ACT Brumbies will battle it out under the lights of Suncorp Stadium on Saturday night, and one team will…
Noah Lolesio delivered a timely reminder of his quality on Friday night, leading the Brumbies to a “statement” 60-21 win over Moana Pasifika in…
Can I just start by saying, how good is rugby! And how good is Super Rugby Pacific this year: close matches, brilliant attack, desperate…
