Why do local rugby derbies have neutral refs?

sheek,you are still not getting my point. It is not the referrals it is the remonstrations and pique and bat throwing and putting the elbow a la Croft into umpires that I am referring to.

Guys, seriously, prior to the 2009 season, SANZAR moved to a merit based system of appointments so that the best refs would get the best games, irrespective of who was playing. From memory, didn't Ian Smith (Aussie, not very good) referee the Reds v Force match in Round 1?

Vinay, I take it all back. The Pakistan-Sri Lanka match was the first 50 over affair I've seen for some time - thoroughly enjoyed it, including the appeal referrals!!!

This debate was refered to on reunion on Wednesday night in NZ The correct interpretation of Derby is a contest between two teams from the same city. In effect we as rugby fans have used the word to reflect our situations. In essence they are nothing but regional showdowns. But for the more simplistic minded we now will refer to local matches as Derbies, right or wrong as it may be the term Derby is here to stay

This debate was refered to on reunion on Wednesday night in NZ The correct interpretation of Derby is a contest between two teams from the same city. In effect we as rugby fans have used the word to reflect our situations. In essence they are nothing but regional showdowns. But for the more simplistic minded we now will refer to local matches as Derbies, right or wrong as it may be the term Derby is here to stay

With the way Qld played last night, we'll never have to worry about that!

Yes Vinay, Thanks for that, I understand what you're saying. I just think the whole thing is getting over the top. Sure, there are going to be times you disagree with a decision but methinks players doth protest too much.....!

sheek,I am actually saying that not accepting the decision adds to the drama.

Vinay, Funny thing. Before we had instant replays, slow motion replays, replays from all angles, we had this wonderful capacity to accept the umpire's or referee's decision 99 times out of 100. We figured it all usually evened itself out. Now, there's disputes left, right & centre. I wonder if money has anything to do with it..........?

Sheek,while we are trying to" neutralise " games we are losing one of the essential drama's of sport.Sport,cricket or rugby,needs umpires who make mistakes...some mistakes can make or break a career...some mistakes can be construed as home town bias. I am asking you guys to think laterally...don't we all actually enjoy the controversies...is there not a vicarious pleasure in seeing an umpire squirm...and a player with demented eyes looking to kill the ref.? Sport like life itself is being sanitised and I think we are losing the "contest"...why must evryone be equal? Life does not work like that..I say bring back the best umpires irrespective of nationality...and if crowds and players start screaming it all adds to the spice of the contest. I would love a Pakistani like Aleem Dar standing in a match at the Eden Gardens and making a howler( no UDRS in India) and then see the crowd get passionate.

For the record, my preference would be local refs who have not been previously booted from two unions ala Steve Walsh. Point well made though.

You see, it doesn't matter who refs really, you'll never please everyone! You may as well save the money and appoint locals. Damned if you do and damned if you don't!

Always thought Kaplan's white streak was self applied! Appears not, unless he's 'whitewashing' the stubble!

The rule was inroduced by the South Africans to ensure they never had to endure Jonathon Kaplan. Genius move really. Kaplan comes here and evens out our conference so SA get a 3rd team in the finals. This must have changed since last year, as I distinctly recall a match between NSW & ACT butchered by an ARU registered Steve Walsh?

You need to have neutrals otherwise NSW would NEVER lose.

I'm all for a neutral ref, it ads a bit of spectacle, makes the game feel much more important. Just not Johnathan Kaplan.

No - what on earth ever for.....???

Right you are, my mistake. Then I put the question to you, should we use Northern Hemisphere refs to officiate the local Southern Hemisphere derbies?

Brett/Tristan, Yes, some years ago now the ICC settled on one home & one neutral umpire, which I think is still the best system we've had. Now we have two neutrals, which isn't necessarily a solution to all ills. Brett's suggestion, by extension of the Ashes, is even better. If Australia & England are playing, have one umpire from each of those countries. If India & Pakistan are playing, have one umpire from each of those countries (oops, probably a poor example there). However, considering the pressure umpires are under, I've often thought 3 umpires the best way to go - 2 stand in the field per session, one acts as TV official. By day's end, each umpire has two sessions in the field & one as TVO. As for nationality, say Australia playing England, one Australian, one English, one neutral. But I guess no matter what system you have, someone won't like it.....

Tristan, I was coming back to this to say exactly what you've just said. And this is the reason why international umpiring remains a year-by-year proposition for an ump as good as Simon Taufel. I see no reason why Australian and English umpires couldn't have stood in the Ashes Tests, for example. The Ashes is why players play, why can't it be why umpires ump??