Super 14 refs need to be held accountable

The players have all moved on to the professional era. The officials, and by this I not only include the refs, but most of the Rugby hierarchy, have not. American Footbal has as many as 6 officials refereeing in a match. Rugby is much faster than Gridiron. Has just as much going on. Has some really technical areas such as scrummaging which can be interpreted in any way you'd like them to be interpreted, depending on who spoke the ref before the game about what. And then there's ruck time. What could be considered entering from the side by one ref, is ok with all the other refs. There was an incident with Steve Walsh this weekend where he penalised the Canes for backchat after he missed clear interference with a player off the ball. Apparently Jonker should have awarded a forward pass, but having looked at the video, I'm still not convinced it was forward, it could have been, but there's just not enough evidence. The Saders were penalised at every scrum last week, this week the Brumbies gets blown up at every scrum. Kabamba Floors gets 5 weeks for spearing a bloke, Franks doesn't even get a yellow card. Dickenson has been just about the best I've seen this year, especially in the Stormers, Saders and Stormers , Sharks games. Kaplan is, well lets just say I have problems with Kaplan, he sometimes misses a good game. Especially if it's a supposedly weaker team against a supposedly stronger team. But then again most of the NZ refs have this same problem. They seem to listen more to the dominant team, especially if they're from a strongr union. But that could just be my bias. There's a principal in juriceprudence that says everybody has a bias which is formed by their paradigm.

As a Brumbies supporter I am gutted, first Steve Walsh destroys a Brumbies final birth through a total joke in refereeing standards. Then comes Bryce Lawrence 9 straight penalties in the second half to end all hope of Brumbies in the finals, surely he must be dragged over the coals dropped from all finals football, he has completely gone against the mantra of favoring the attacking side. The refereeing must improve as the arena expands or it will become a joke not to mention the money that it costs a club to be ejected before a final due to an inept ref. SORT IT OUT!!!!

Its all well and good to say they're only human, but simple laws are being ignored. Difficult though as it seems the ladies club they have commentating often ignore these too. Some of the issues in the last few games I’ve watched: The maul. A player walking behind a maul with one hand on the guy in front, looking abou like he’s window shopping is not in the maul and is shepherding. Its one of the slowest parts of the game and they still get it wrong. The pick and go. If the ball is picked up the player with the ball needs to be tackled before a team member can bind on to him. I’m not talking of a push, but a full bind. Not to take away the Crusaders great victory, but McCaw’s bonus point try v the Brumbies (May 14) was a wedge of five players before a Brumbies player made contact. There was less than half a metre in it, but it was illegal play. The clear out. If a player is standing behind or next to a ruck he cannot be taken out. There have been numerous occasions where defenders have been taken out and many resulting in large gains or tries. This is illegal play. I know they will miss things and make errors, but my girl friend knows the laws better than some of the refs.

LFC - valid points, they all make mistakes & unless tehy explain the reasoning we have no idea what's going through their heads. These days we get to analyse them better & gripe about why we lost due to a couple of dodgy calls. Supporters have complained about the ref for as long as there's been games, this is just an outelt %-) FYI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6hYXtwc_L4 1:15 for the first yellow- (a bit harsh IMO 2:44 for the second yellow - definitely deserved. Unfortunately the link doesn't show the Franks/McCaw tackles for a comparison.

No, I can't. I don't know on what basis he made those decisions. You'd have to ask the referee and I can assure you that his coach, assessor and the panel will have asked those very questions.

So here is a test for you if you saw the Crusaders/Bulls game last week. Roussouw and van der Heever get yellow carded for dangerous tackles (above the shoulder and spear respectively) plus the Bulls can't select van der Heever for the next 2 games. When Franks and McCaw do precisely the same they only get penalties against them, no sin bin. Please explain.

Of course there's an excuse - they're human and they make mistakes! As for consistency - it's only what you perceive as inconsistency. You don't know on what basis the referee made any call or what thought processes contributed to it. Again I will tell you that until you've been through the same training process and blown the whistle, you will never know.

Fair comment but the Super 14/Tri Nations refs are the cream of the crop and therefore we are less forgiving when they make fundamental errors like being inconsistent. There is not excuse for that. They also have the touchies who assist and maybe there is a way for them to be more effective without taking too much away from the ref or the flow of the game.

I'd like to know exactly how many of the contributors to this have had any experience refereeing? If you haven't then you are in no position whatsoever to make any assessment of referees or refereeing, since you don't have the faintest idea what is required or how referees are assessed.

Consistency - this is a crucial attribute for any referee. Jonker was particularly guilty of this last weel (Crusaders/Bulls). He yellow carded Roussouw and van der Heever (who also got a 2 match ban) for dangerous tackles, but only awarded penalties against Franks and McCaw fro precisely the same infringements. Why not deal with all four offenders in the same way?

Jerry, thanks for the clarification of the rule.

Uh, you're the one talking rubbish Lee. If that were true, a defending team could simply all stand offside right beside their counterpart and would all be onside once the ball came out of the ruck. If you're offside when a ruck ends, you're still offside until the ball is passed by an opponent or an opponent runs 5m with the ball.

After missing 5 rounds of the S14 due to an overseas holiday, the early strict policing of the ruck was gone when I returned to watching rugby again. The main change was refusing to whistle out offside players slowing down the ball in or after the tackle - this allowed more steals to occur, or penalties for not releasing, when the tackled player was unable to property play the ball as he wished. And the general quality of refereeing has been dismal also.

RugbyNSWFAN, Not taking away from your right to an opinion, but if you are going to write an article like this and want to be taken seriously, know your subject matter. You don't appear to know anything about referee assessments, nor who Bryce's dad is. Bryce Lawrence's father is Keith Lawrence. Keith was an international ref in his time also and now is the referee manager for the IRB 7's circuit.

Rubbish if the ball is out of the ruck, then to all purposes the ruck no longer exists. You do not need to come through a 'gate' to pick up a loose ball. This entire article smacks of an anti sa sentiment. Not one mention of Steve walshs bad performances,or dickenson fantastic record when you look at wins when sa teams are playing or te waratahs are playing. If you want to have a go at the consistency of the referee panel you would add a lot more weight to your argument by being consistent in your own approach.

if there's one ref that is a turn off for any game it's dickinson. we don't watch games to see you, we want to see the players. craig joubert has dropped his form a bit but he remains the ref I'd most like to see control a game. if we want ref's to be accountable, why are we not seeing anything about their overall performance? the only time we see anything from lyndon bray is a late decision that influences the result, even if it was around 3 points out of 50 in a game. Why are we seeing comments about the whole match performance? If I was a ref I'd be very peeved at a boss who only pipes up in public over our mistakes, and never our overall performance. And his comments over matt giteau - whether he should have been suspended or not is not the decision of the referees, bray should have been disciplined with a $5000 fine as well for making those comments. neutral ref's are a must, every fan has said so from the instant the policy was changed.

Brett, it ws a great idea but probably fell in the 'oh hell we'll have to explain all our mistakes every week' basket.

No one's mentioned New Zealand's Vinny Munro, one of the best refs in this year's Super 14.

"BTW Fourie wasn’t offside in the steal since the ball was past the hindmost foot of the last man in the ruck – blame Ellis for slow reflexes." Loftus, it doesn't matter where the ball is. Du Prez has to come through the "gate" to get it. He didn't and was never on his side of the ruck to start with.

The purpose of the interpretations was to improve the quality of the rugby which they've done. Who cares if a bunch of Aussies are complaining about the refs? That's nothing new and doesn't require any special interpretations.