It is time for referees to be held publicly accountable. Our players and coaches are, so why not refs?
Why is there this closed door mentality by referee bodies to protect their refereeing actions by silence?
Surely they too should front up to a media after game conference and be quizzed over their actions of the game.
There appears to be at lot of differences in interpretation between the northern and southern hemispheres.
Players have an after game conference, referees should be subject to the same scrutiny.
We need an explanation as to why some rules were being enforced more pedantically than others, and more specifically, why different hemisphere refs do things differently.
The other advantage is that the fan would get to learn more about the referee and his personality.
By including the assistant referees into the question time panel, it would provide a much better understanding as to the reasoning why a decision was made.
It could be a way to have explained publicly what the hierarchy has determined to be the focus of the match officials.
By opening the doors to understanding it defuses much of the confusion.
The panel should have the same option to decline replies to questions being asked that are inappropriate or vindictively personal and answer only questions about the game and how it was managed.
Naturally there will be questions about why many of the calls during the game were considered mysterious, misinterpreted or misunderstood.
A forthcoming explanation from the panel would overcome much of the ‘finger pointing’ that follows many matches.
Currently, the referee associations and associated bodies have an attitude of “neither confirm nor deny” when it comes to controversial rulings in the game. The IRB are opaque on the issue.
In the modern game, this lack of transparency is not good enough.
It is time for referees to remove the secret society attitude, front up and deliver.
Whether they believe it or not, they too, are players in the game.
RF
Guest
Rugby has become a game if "Referee's Roulette". The management of this part of our game is appalling. Crooked scrum feeds, tackling players without the ball , running interference in front of the ball carrier ( see ABs second try in B1). It is simply very, very poor.
Ai Rui Sheng
Guest
Why do we not see referees from the PI officiating at international level? The UK gets more votes than the entire SH and Samoa gets one forty-eighth of the votes that the UK gets. Why were there so few SH referees at the RWC? A conspiracy to make the UK appear more competitive? Scotland recently played depleted PI teams and beat the Gunnahs. The Gunnahs' players played three days earlier. The PI players were offered cash inducements not to play by the Bleatingish. Has the introduction of RWC spots according to irb rankings induced the racist Gerrymander to further corruption? WE may never know because the irb obstructs investigating of corruption. e.g. match fixing.
Red Menace
Guest
I think it would be a circus but I wonder if the refs have a chat to coaches after games? When I blew a whistle, I would always have a chat after the game. Didn't matter if it was Under 9's or first grade. If any young ref is reading this, do the same, it will help your game. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
Yikes
Guest
And as for this bit: "It could be a way to have explained publicly what the hierarchy has determined to be the focus of the match officials. By opening the doors to understanding it defuses much of the confusion." All of this information ie the focus of the match officials, is available to and communicated to the commentators. Isn't it their job to perform the role of communicating this to the public? Rather than do what they do currently (in Australia at least) which is compete amongst themselves as to who can claim to be the most clueless as to exactly what is happening on field.
Yikes
Guest
Yawn yawn yawn. How exactly would the game benefit from having referees appearing at press conferences? The media would only be interested in talking to them if there was a particularly controversial call, which is bound to be discussed and analysed anyway, and which the ref in question will either have gotten right or wrong. It's not like you'll be getting the referees explaining their thought processes after games to the hoards of journos hanging on their every word to immediately transmit this learning to the newspaper-reading and online media-consuming masses for the betterment of humanity. It will just become a circus of hanging a ref out to dry. And if it's not, no one will care. The reason match officials should not be criticised by coaches, players etc is because to do so is a cowardly act - the refs cannot bite back, they have no public arena to respond. And why not? Because then the public impression of the game becomes a farce, eg: http://www.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/story/167395.html
redsnut
Guest
And also why do the toutchies/assistants seem to play so little part in what goes on, (especially those occasions when they have a better view than the ref) since they were officially given the duty/responibility.
Bakkies
Guest
No. Paddy O'Brien tried to do appraisals in front of the media and his refs were explaining calls (or apologising for incorrect ones), it was a complete disaster. O'Brien's impartiality and professionalism was called in to question particularly after the Milan test. Two experienced referees were mistreated by O'Brien (Mark Lawrence and Dickenson) and incompetent refs like Poite, Bryce Lawrence and Kaplan were kept on the panel. O'Brien handling of Dickenson and ruining his own reputation publicly was a disaster for the IRB and the game itself.
mitzter
Guest
Look referees at high levels are scrutinised every game. Why they made those calls, why they gave that card are all discussed. They all make mistakes (just like players and coaches) but they MOSTLY get it right despite the decision being made in less than a second. I don't agree with every decison and sometimes I realise we're lucky in a decision. That's the game. I don't really see the point in having a press conference with the ref as both sides could think of instances where things didn't go their way, you only have to listen to phil kearns to realise that most people have no idea what they are talking about.