Last week, SANZAR game manager, Lyndon Bray, made the admission that South African referee Marius Jonker had erred in not stopping play for ‘that knock-on’ during the Week nine Bulls-Brumbies match in Pretoria.
It was all about the timing. About this time last week, buried in among all the Week 10 previews and speculation over Will Genia’s future, was the confirmation of something the Super Rugby public already knew.
In fact, Jonker had more than erred, Bray said, he’d made “a stone-cold mistake”.
Now, don’t be worried if you had missed hearing or reading this news. The few outlets running the report – and The Roar wasn’t one of them – used the same wire story, and as far as I can tell, there was no formal SANZAR Media Release. Similarly, there’s still no mention of it on SANZAR’s Super Rugby site.
With the safety of the news week just about done, and with Jonker already slated to officiate the Cheetahs-Highlanders game played last Sunday morning Australian time, Bray was surprisingly frank.
“That particular error is just a stone-cold mistake,” Bray said in the reports.
“He’s just got to put his hand up and say ‘we got it completely wrong’.
“That was between the assistant referee and the referee and that cost seven points.”
In the context of the Brumbies 36-34 loss, those seven points would’ve been mighty handy. The extra three points they’d have gained from winning that game would have further entrenched them in the top six – maybe even easing debate on whether conference leaders are worthy of a home final regardless of their actual points tally.
Even further than that, those extra three points would’ve opened up a nice little gap over the chasing Waratahs and Reds in the Australian conference.
Of course, this is nothing new for Australian teams. The Waratahs themselves were the victims in the first game of the year against the Reds. On that occasion, a runaway Tatafu Polota-Nau try was disallowed after Jaco Peyper and his assistant ruled that the pass to the Waratahs hooker from Tom Kingston was forward.
The following week, Lyndon Bray was on the case, suggesting that due to the closeness of the call, the Waratahs possibly should’ve received the benefit of the doubt.
“I’ve looked at it and it was very tight as to whether it was forward or not,” Bray said in reports at the time.
“It was a tricky one. You’ve got to ignore the body position of the player which was ahead of the ball before he caught it.
“It looked to me that if it was forward, it was only marginally so.”
“It was an example of something not being clear and obvious enough to call it forward.”
We may yet hear more about the Western Force being ‘robbed’, with Brian Habana fairly obviously losing control of the ball in scoring the Stormers first try on Saturday night in Perth. Habana’s try wasn’t sent upstairs for the TMO; Jaco Peyper – yes, him again – awarded the try on the spot.
And it’s very nice of Lyndon Bray to come out and say all this. Very touchy-feely and fuzzy-warm.
But it achieves nothing.
Token admissions like these don’t right the wrong. The Bulls try still stands, as do the four points they gained for the win. The Waratahs don’t suddenly have one added to their ‘Tries scored’ column, and Polota-Nau is no closer to topping the ‘Tahs leading try-scorer list.
So what is the point of coming out with these admissions? We know that referees are human beings, and therefore, are prone to making human mistakes.
But are they really mistakes? Since we aren’t allowed to hear the thoughts of refs after a match, we’ll never know if these guys believe they erred or not.
In fact, given the referee is the sole officiator of the laws of the game, and the only man with the responsibility of having to make a decision in an instant on something that happened right there and then, we should be giving them some benefit of the doubt, too.
For all we know, Peyper may still believe the pass to Polota-Nau was forward, and likewise, Jonker may still think Morne Steyn didn’t knock the ball on. They’d be well entitled to believe they made the right call.
And frankly, I’d prefer they did.
I think rugby has it right in not allowing the TMO to rule on things happening outside the in-goal area. It means there never has to be any hesitation by the man with the whistle in-play, and likewise, no reliance on a television director to provide the right angle to see if a ball was knocked, or was passed forward.
The Roar’s own Andrew Logan nailed it last night on ABC Grandstand: “Sport wasn’t meant to be perfect. There should always be some level of imperfection,” Loges told Peter Wilkins, on the topic of video adjudication.
It keeps a reliance on the human element that referees bring to the game of rugby, and thus retains that possibility of mistakes being made. But I would much rather the refs make the odd mistake than have the game overrun by the use of video adjudication.
Furthermore, the focus should be that these professional referees get the very vast majority of decisions right.
Lyndon Bray’s comments don’t solve anything, and nor will they stop mistakes being made. Better he make no comment at all and just let the decision and the mystery of its accuracy stand as is.
As a former top-level referee himself, Bray of all people should know that accepting the refs decision doesn’t only apply to the players.
Moaman
Guest
Great comment MattyP.Couldn't agree more.
Lippy
Guest
and the Myth refs are untouchable and whining will continue
Blue Blood
Guest
Im with you. I was also at the game and when the ball popped back and he was so obviously just at the line I was waiting for the TMO to make the call. I was floored when the ref finally got close and just awarded the try blind. But the ref missed clear 3 knock ons by the Stormers when they were at his and the Touchies feet, so by the end of the game I wasn't surprised about the try call. I accept that calls will go against each team during a game. But I do think that a 20sec delay in the game once a try has possibly happened that the TMO earns his match fee. I sometimes think that it is a power/control thing of refs not to use it. We are all human and can easily make mistakes. Please just check. No one thinks less of you for taking the 20sec while the team sets up their possible conversion kick anyway.
sixo_clock
Roar Guru
The Brums don't need a kicker if they can get 30 points every game from tries!! That crafty Jake character has it all worked out, he's keeping the game plan very simple, the kick justs let everyone take a breather while the kicker keeps the other side panting at the line. JW has thought of everything. Woomera White we should be calling him.
Uncle Eric
Guest
Referees making mistakes are simply part of the game. However refereeing implies a level of impartiality and objectivity and for this reason must be neutral from a nationality, state, hometown point of view. If they're not then they are placed in an impossible position, damned if they do and damned if they don't, as a local referee may well be seen to be 'against' the opposition, or seen as 'favouring' them in order to be perceived as impartial. Seriously, the refereeing and touch judge standard hasn't been fantastic in S15 for some time now, but the fact that neutral refs and tj's aren't used is simply farcical.
PeterK
Guest
sure I agree in regards to players in questioning decisions. But not in terms of evaluating their performance. Also for professionals they need to be accountable as opposed to the amateur refs which is a totally different issue. Also need to bring in more technology to improve vital decisions. Finally I think the referral system is great in cricket and a version should be introduced into rugby.
stillmatic1
Guest
p.s its late, im tired, and i agree in part to what Brett is saying in his article. why be critical if its not going to fix anything? is it our fault for accepting it? or their fault for saying it? we all love the game, but apathy is a killer.
stillmatic1
Guest
why do we continue to claim that the sport of rugby is professional but then omit one of the main facets of the game from BEING professional? simply getting paid to do something doesnt make one professional, working hard at your craft doesnt make you professional, what makes someone professional is the accountability he/she has over the decisions that he/she makes in their profession. getting paid, working hard, and being accountable is what makes a professional. the players make mistakes, sure, but i pay to see them and if they perform poorly then they tend to see less game time, get a roasting by the public (which by the way happens to be a by product of sport, not just so called modern-day professional sport!!) and get dropped. but in a so called professional sport, again, we give the ref more leeway, because of some amateur, antiquated thought process that happens to stop the game becoming truly professional. the angst about the use of the available technology is case in point. we can do so many things with technology at our disposal, but look for as many excuses as possible to make sure that they never get implemented. support the refs as much as possible to get the decisions right, and by this, most of us would mean to say the game changing blunders that generally lose teams the game. the ref deserves no more respect than any other man on the paddock, he is simply a component part of the overall package. just like up and coming players, nurture them through the ranks, develop the skills, but when it comes to the top flight, they should not be spared the criticism that everyone else in the game receives. sport is just that, sport, but is also now a job for so many people and needs to be treated as such. the elements that make the game will still be there, the tight finish, the blowout, the inept field kicking or goal kicking and the missed tackles, but the game will be decided by the players. again, this is only about cleaning up the blunders. the 50/50s are exactly that ( how about mccaw last year in the loss to the reds at suncorp? or pocock earlier this year?). it is not an excuse to simply trot out the line that it was "human error" or "he is only human". what does that even mean? that we continue to refuse the help that is required to increase our infallibility? i wish i could just excuse the errors my staff make by just going "oh well, your only human" and then let them continue to make the same errors over and over again!! if the sideline refs cannot keep up with a flying winger, how can they officiate the game properly? if they are the sole applicators of the rules, then how do they rule if they cant even keep up with the play? how many forward passes get missed each week, that lead to a try for a team? with games as tight as they are, why should peoples livelihoods be put in jeopardy because of these kinds of blunders that determine the result? we dont accept it in other professions. does the airline pilot get this kind of leeway, and lack of help to boot? what of the formula one driver? we may deride american sports, NFL in particular, but the blunders are considerably less in their sports because they appreciate and accept the use of technology to help the on field officials. and correct use of the technology does not have to mean a lapse in game time either. the TMO sees the game at the same speed in which all the fans in the stands do, so how hard is it to relay the error down to the ref? forward pass from genia to ioane, marius, pull that up please. 3 forward passes, each one worse than the last in the saders game a couple of weeks ago!! all in the one movement!! and everyone on the planet saw it, but its ok because the on filed officials didnt!? and the antiquated, amateurs amongst us, just sigh and say, ohh, its ok, its just part of the game. you cant call it JUST a game or sport and then call it professional aswell. in summary, im all for the use of technology to clean up the game changing blunders, and im all for the refs getting all the help they need to enjoy the job that they have worked their butts off for. it cant be easy to get hammered by the rabid fans, but then again, this is the job they have chosen. as sheek said about richie mccaw " asking him to not push the limits is like not asking a soldier to shoot". the refs work hard, but not harder than anyone else. the refs cop flak, but not more than anyone else. the refs deserve help, clarity from their bosses, respect, but not more than anyone else.
Brett McKay
Expert
I can hardly expect a response if I didn't, can I?
steve.h
Guest
The two decisions that went against South African teamsin favour of Australian and New Zealand opposition? Mistakes are apart of the game.
Brett McKay
Expert
Loftus, I can assure you there's nothing sinister in using the examples I did. I could've trawled through websites around the world and found 100 examples, but the point here wouldn't have changed: the admissions dosn't actually do anything in the grand scheme...
Brett McKay
Expert
That's a great post MattyP, I reckon we were all told that in some shape or form as youngsters.. "Right or wrong, therefore, he is right." Spot on...
Damo
Guest
Like jeznez's line about the refs papal infallibility. And I agree that all players must genuflect to his authourity every time he asserts it. No other attitude will serve a player or a team. However, as a fan with an expectation that the man with the whistle is paid to facilitate a fair contest, I am allowed other attitudes. In fact unless it's 1984 and we are under the eye of the Thought Police, we fans can have any attitude we choose. SAnzar must pay extra for neutral refs. Jonker did the highlanders cheetahs game. It was if only one side was being refereed. Get out Green! Hands off Green! Leave it green! I was a neutral watching a game that was almost ruined by a referee. He may be a good referee. There may be cultural differences between SA and NZ teams around the breakdown. Perhaps the ' landers were breaking local ruck taboos that they were unaware of. Whatever, sanzar get the mousetraps out of your pockets and start flying a few referees around the hemisphere. The ref may be infallible but sanzar isn't.
Brett McKay
Expert
PK, on the video ref, funnily enough, I think your description of what you'd look at is where we're heading. I think the current in-goal only view is right, but I can see it changing. As to your points on mistakes, this is exactly my point. The knock-on (or not) was one moment in the game, and on the whole, I think Jonker had a good game. So why publically admoinish him for that one moment, particularly when nothing more came from it. If it truly was a "stone cold mistake", as Bray put it, then why the heck did Jonker referee the following week? This is my whole point, these admissions mean nothing, achieve nothing, and solve nothing..
Steve.H
Guest
Lyndon Bray admitted that the referees made mistakes with both the awarding of the final penalty in the Brumbies vs Cheetahs which lead to the Brumbies winning and with not giving the Bulls a penalty on halfway after Rene Ranger divided on Basson. Mistakes happen, its just hard for fans to accept when it effects their respective teams but there is no much that can be done.
sittingbison
Roar Pro
I went to a not catholic school and was told the ref was like God - omnipotent and omniscient %)
Jarmen
Guest
So have you Brett? Did you write a please explain email to Mr Bray?
jeznez
Roar Guru
Timani was a shocker in that cleanout before Horne's try. I did like the fact that he belted a bloke as he did it though!
jeznez
Roar Guru
Nice one MattyP. I went to a catholic school and we were told that the referee was like the Pope - Infallible. Even if it looked like the ref was wrong he wasn't! A timely reminder - my school years are a long way behind me and I frequently forget that little gem.
Jarmen
Guest
How is it any more token than anything else SANZAR and the IRB does Brett? In response to Craig it wasn't hidden at the back of the news here in NZ it was very much a story on Stuffs website and I believe someone posted the link on one of the threads here at the Roar. maybe it was back page fodder in Australia but I certainly remember reading it and it wasn't in the side columns either. I agree with what Lippy is saying, every other day on this thread people are whinging about the refs getting decisions wrong and that the should be held accountable and critiqued just like the players. Thats exactly what Mr Bray has done here he has gone public and admitting Jonker got it wrong, in itself a way of shaming his own official. But no thats still not good enough for some people. What do you want Brett do you want him to be sent to the judiciary and suspended for misconduct, bringing the game into disrepute? Their really is no pleasing some people, it seems some people will just complain for the sake of complaing.