On Tuesday SANZAR announced the referee appointments for the 2012 Super Rugby semi-finals: Craig Joubert for the Chiefs-Crusaders match, and Steve Walsh for the Stormers-Sharks.
Walsh, a former New Zealand referee who now is employed by the ARU, should referee the final, which will be between a South African side and a New Zealand side.
I say ‘should’ because SANZAR is still maintaining the nonsense of appointing a non-neutral referee for the final.
Readers of The Roar will know that I regard Craig Joubert as the best referee in the world right now. But this does not mean he should referee the final. Someone not aligned to New Zealand or South Africa needs to have the job.
The principle here is that ‘competitive neutrality’ is a must for finals rugby in the Super Rugby tournament, as it is in the Six Nations, the Heineken Cup and the Rugby World Cup tournaments. This principle is says that the best neutral referee should officiate in the finals matches.
Someone like Joubert might never get to referee a Super Rugby final, or perhaps only a couple of times in a long career, because of the strength of South African rugby. But the same could apply to different countries in different eras.
There are swings and roundabouts in the competitive neutrality principle. Because the Springboks were eliminated in the quarter-finals of the 2011 Rugby World Cup, Joubert got to referee the final between New Zealand and France. The top New Zealand and French referees missed out on this rare privilege.
Them’s the breaks, folks.
But there remains a worrying reluctance on the part of SANZAR to accept the competitive neutrality principle. On announcing the semi-final appointments, Game Manager Lyndon Bray said “The four best referees have been selected on their performances this season for the Finals Series. The two best performing referees are now selected for the Semi-Final matches, and in the first instance will go head to head for the Final. If the form of one referee who refereed the Qualifying Final is considered on review to be better than the semi-final referees, then they are still considered in the mix for the Final.”
This suggests that Joubert is still in the running for the final, or Jonathan Kaplan or Jaco Peyper. This is totally wrong.
Bray also made the point that the “coaches have been an integral part of endorsing the appointment of our referees in the Super Rugby Finals Series.”
If this means, as it suggests, that the coaches are in favour of non-neutral referees, then I would beg to differ. My information is that this is not the case.
It certainly wasn’t the case when Ewen McKenzie was asked after the Reds-Sharks match whether he was happy with some of the decisions made by Kaplan, especially the controversial instruction to the TMO to rule only on the “first grounding” in assessing Liam Gill’s try.
The first grounding, as interpreted by Matt Goddard, was made by Digby Ioane. And it was clearly short, even without the benefit of the TMO replays. But Gill’s grounding was over the line. A try should have been awarded, as Bray has admitted.
When told about this, McKenzie insisted that had the question been the usual “try or no try,” then the game could have been turned. With plenty of time to play with and rampantly on top, the Reds would have moved to within 10 points of the Sharks, who looked out on their feet.
As McKenzie noted, “the flow of the game changes” on these sort of decisions.
In my report on Monday I raised this matter of the question that Kaplan asked. I have never heard this question asked before. It was the only question that could have been asked, too, that meant Gill’s efforts could not be taken into account.
None of this should be read to impugn Kaplan’s integrity. But it is a strong criticism of the format that placed him in this situation in the first place.
The principle of competitive neutrality is not based on the possibility of referees being biased. They are not biased. The essential points relate to perception by players and supporters, the aligned notion that justice must not just be done, but be seen to be done, and the unfairness of exposing referees to claims that they have been biased.
This is a far more complicated argument than Bray and others will acknowledge in the face of criticism.
Referees are not biased, but supporters are. Meaning that referees should not be placed in a situation where their impartiality comes into question.
My understanding, too, is that there are moves to ensure that neutral referees will officiate in the finals next season. Good. But the principle’s implementation should be fast-forwarded to this year’s final, wherever it is played.
David
Guest
My irritation is that we have cherry picked, 2nd and 3rd hand comments that Bray said. If Bray is going to repudiate any ref in a way it gets to the public domain then he needs to do it properly or he needs to keep quiet. I understand that Kaplans instructions were not conventional. But many are taking these 2nd hand, cherry picked 'quotes' and then stating the story is complete. There is so much we don't know - did Bray formally review the footage and get Kaplan and Goddards explanation or was this more informal and from the hip? I would hope the former but given the speed I can't help but wonder about the latter. I wouldn't like my job performance discussed publically by my boss before my input. - it sounds to me like Brays comments were one on one I still don't know how it wasn't a ruck infringement. If the head of refs is going to go public then I am happy BUT - publish something official that is more complete. No misquoting or cherry picking would be possible. - be consistent in the selection of incidents . I think the last time Bray 'went public' was the Bulls Crusaders game when there was an infringement after a try was scored in injury time. What about the TMO mistakes made in the Crusaders last pool game?
atlas
Guest
^ inexplicably ? Mark Lawrence - go back to the end of 2009, where his international career took a dive: "Take the South African refereeing duo, Marius Jonker and Mark Lawrence who took charge of internationals in the recently completed autumn Test series. Both have been axed from the world referees’ panel for the 6 Nations Championship in the New Year. The duo, heavily criticised for poor performances in the November Tests, have not even been chosen as assistant referees for the 15-match programme starting in February." "That will be tough for the axed South African pair given they are not even involved as Assistant Referees. They have both paid the price for sub-standard displays last month; Jonker in the Ireland v New Zealand game and Lawrence in the Ireland v Argentina Test. Lawrence’s performance which included some completely wrong calls, astonished certain senior officials." http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/news-comment/peter-bills-irb-deserve-praise-for-punishing-substandard-refereeing-2154473.html
PB
Guest
If the Reds had been "rampantly on top" (as described by Spiro) at the time of the TMO no-try, they should have easily scored from the 5m scrum.
Jeff
Guest
If you read my post properly you will see all I am asking for is some clarification of the rules from a person who has a claim to expertise unlike myself. And unlike you I am saying I thought this was the correct interpretation of the rules but it appears I could be wrong.But you of course seem to know all the rules including what percentage of time each team is offside etc etc. I wonder if you ever get to watch the game just for the enjoyment of it. Like watching the Crusaders Chiefs match a fortnight ago and just enjoying the thrill of a good rugby match that you have no personal interest in.
Exactly why I said he has a knack, mate.
mania
Guest
agree david - thers way too many crap refs around that are an issue before we can really whinge about neutral refs.
mania
Guest
biltongbek - intimidating refs isnt richies style. thats more rockyElsom. nah richies much more benign in that he's real polite and the refs cant help but reflect the respectful way he talks to them. its simple manners that defuses the situation. its hard to be angry at someone thats polite to you. something so simple but so many captains dont get. i teach my boys how to talk to the refs and i have them always saying "sir" and "thank you", when they get awarded a penalty my boys will applaud the ref while saying "thank you sir, good call". its not intimidation but it is good ref management.
mania
Guest
thats all good gordo. i'm just checking the psychology of what i see compared to whats others do. the way i see it gill is only on his feet when he gets to the ruck. he's not the first person there as 2-3 other players are already lying on top of ioane. digby is clutching at the ball (like a cannibal with a new born) not realising that his team mates want it so it gets ripped off him. the ripper turns their body and some how gill gets it. imo gills off his feet already but somehow gets enough leverage to push through the bodies on top of him to score. its wierd how the same footage can be interpretted so differently. i'd hate to be a ref
Hollywood
Guest
http://www.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/story/167395.html I think this is aimed at you spiro! Seriously this has been a great season and I couldn't give two hoots about refs! The players are deciding the outcomes and it has been a good season -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
atlas
Guest
Why "not an All Blacks match, obviously"? Wayne Barnes - you'll find he was in NZ in 2009 and also 2010 for Super Rugby and Air NZ Cup (now ITM Cup) officials duties, 2010 included his reffing the All Blacks v Ireland test in New Plymouth June 2010, ref for Wallabies v ABs at Suncorp 2011, and he was back in NZ again in 2011 for RWC, without fuss. People have got over it.
pim
Guest
mind reader as well?
That's a relief.
You find me one example of where I used any comment that can be construed as Anti-Reds. I dare ya.
David
Guest
I agree wih you about Mark Lawrence. My favourite ref too. However he inexplicably got left of the Refs Team for WC2011 and retired. Well it wasnt inexplicable. They could not add any more SAns otherwise there would be too many. He retired from international reffing. It could be because if he was so lowly ranked but I am not sure. Pick the best refs...
Red Kev
Guest
I still think SA Ref Mark Lawrence is the best going around - but if I recall correctly he has retired (at least from test match rugby).
David
Guest
Really objective? All of them? Period? Or are you letting you dislike of Kaplan cloud matters? SA has produced more decent refs than most. We need more refs
Micky T
Guest
South Africa refs kill games period!. As an Aussie I would rather have a biased NZ ref in a Bledisloe Test rather than a showpony like Kaplan checking himself out. On early comments, the general state of refs is thin on th ground.
Touko
Guest
He may be Inane from time to time, but when he dances he's Insane. (Sorry.)
Atawhai Drive
Roar Guru
According to a piece running on Scrum.com, Bryce Lawrence won't be appointed to Tests again.
David
Guest
I prefer neutral referees if there are sufficient decent referees available. Having said that if my beloved Sharks make the final I would rather have a good NZ or SA ref than a crap Australian one. And therein lies the problem.... Supply. Australia unfortunately has not got many refs. Steve Walsh. He may be Australian now but when he watches a NZ vs Aus game with his mates, I wonder where his allegiances lie? But let's leave that aside and assume he is Australian 'aligned'. Steve Walsh isnt that good. So practically we can't trot out Steve whenever NZ and a SA sides play. We could fly a NH ref in for the finals but what's the message here. Are all the cross conference pool games unimportant? It only takes one match to unjustly knock a side out the top 6 or at least consign them to an away knock out match. Spiro - the fix is a long term one. Each country needs to produce enough refs. But even then in a tripartite setup it won't be easy. If we are contending that refs are unconsciously biased (I hope no one apart from murphs is alleging they cheat) in favor of their own side then surely they could be unconsciously biased against another side. For me 'neutral' is the side issue. If we have enough excellent refs (regardless of country) around then we don't have a problem. Refs that have too many bad games will get demoted and no longer hurt us. Refs that improve will be promoted. Let's just have more good refs and stuff this neutral issue