There’s been a resurgence of grumpiness recently about referees and nationality bias, with some observers suggesting the non-neutrality of the referee’s origin may result in a non-neutrality of the referee’s decision; not necessarily all the time, but if it happens once, it’s one time too many.
It’s not just in Super Rugby (but some chaps are pretty vocal about that), it’s questionable in the Pro 12 too.
Any time the discussion turns to nationality bias, the credibility of the whole game is undermined. Surely any cross-border game should have a referee from neither country.
Firstly, I don’t believe any referee would ever consciously be biased this way. I can’t imagine a referee would go out with the attitude of giving decisions to the home team. I can’t believe, either, any refs would want to give decisions to the team from their own country.
Referees depend on their impartiality for their career and fairness is built into them from their first training session.
However, human beings can be intimidated. They might be overawed by the atmosphere, impressed by the presence of players on the field or have a briefing by their home union nagging away at the back of their mind. That sort of unconscious bias is a different issue.
Is there any sense at all in allowing the possibility of such an unconscious bias occurring? I think not.
The mind can be fragile under pressure. It can be trained for mental toughness, but that doesn’t guarantee it can hold up when the going gets tough.
Mental toughness is the umbrella term used to group together five general sport psychology targets: confidence, concentration, communication, emotions and motivation.
Since every player is different in terms of these toughness headings, it stands to reason that each referee is different too. And since any one of these might fail during a game for a player, so they might fail for a referee.
We can assume reduction of the need for mental toughness is a good thing in a referee.
We can increase the referee’s confidence, so it’s not a factor, by eliminating self-doubt. We can increase referee’s concentration levels to full. We can standardise communication, we can eliminate emotions and remove motivation.
We could have a robot doing the job. And if we could have a robot doing the job, then I’m sure we would. That would remove the need for mental toughness. But it’s a long way off.
However, let’s minimise ‘individuality’ in the referee’s thoughts and mental toughness. In particular, let’s minimise the idea there may be any bias in the referee’s performance.
Can we remove the thought from the referee’s head: “Am I about to give this decision because I want the team from my own country to win?”
Yes we can. Let’s not have referees in charge of games featuring a team from their home country.
Can we remove the thought from the fans and the governing organisations’ minds: “Is that referee about to give a decision because he wants the team from his own country to win?”
Yes we can. Let’s not have referees in charge of games featuring a team from their home country.
Livelihoods are at stake, careers are being built and the whole credibility of the organisation is on the line. These are important pillars holding up the structure of rugby. Crowds want to see their team winning, but more than that, they want to see their team winning fairly.
To have an element of doubt in that perception of fair play is to introduce the risk the crowd will spend their money on another pastime.
If a sport cannot say it is conducted fairly, with parity of decision-making just, equal and true for both opponents, it is hard to say it is a sport at all.
There’s enough risk in rugby by playing the game, I cannot see any point in putting an avoidable element of risk into the mix.
The players have a hard enough job being asked to conform to the rules of fair-play in the white-hot atmosphere of first-class rugby. It’s not a quiet game, rugby. It’s a testosterone-filled, aggression-fuelled, emotion-driven clash of massive blokes at the edge of human fitness capability, at the peak of mankind’s physicality.
We expect these athletes to conform to the game’s fair-play conventions. We expect the referees to conform to the game’s fair-play conventions. By and large they all do. But why have any risk at all that any bias whatsoever exists?
If it’s about cash, then how much does it cost when a fan switches off or doesn’t go to the game? And not the diehard fans that watch through thick-and-thin either. It’s the marginal ones, who watch when they think it’s all above board. Plenty other things for them to do.
Referees from neutral counties. How difficult can it be?
David Baker
Roar Pro
The ABs didn't tour SA in the 50s Were you really around back then or have you been listening to the blazer wearing flatulent old geezers in the club bar?
Vic
Guest
Jeez, you don't want to give him too much time to get over it, if he remembers the 1950's matches he doesn't have a lot of time left......
Jerry
Guest
"Frankly,no team has had an easier ride in a WC.but like you,that’s just my opinion." It's an opinion with a solid basis in fact. SA's playoff opponents were by far the lowest ranked of any RWC winner.
Jerry
Guest
"In 1995 the Boks went unbeaten the whole year, and won 15 or 16 games in a row. Just 10 days short of a full 2 years without being beaten." Yeah, but they played the AB's exactly once in that streak and most of the team was sick. In 1994 they lost 2 and drew 1 and in 1996 they lost 4 and won 1.
richard
Guest
I disagree.Let's look at it- 1995 - you may have won 15/6 in a row,but the outstanding team was the ABs.If not for some dodgy refereeing in the SF v France,you wouldn't have even made the final.The ABs were screwed over in this tournament,it seemed to be all about Mandela and giving SA a victory for the new 'rainbow nation". 1999 - our team was mud,the mass retirements of a group of greats had never been replaced. 2003 - agree with you there.Even though NZ had dominated the Tri-Nations,England were the definite favourites.And even then they made hard work of winning it. 2007 - you can talk about choking,I prefer to call it 'mis- management' by Sir Graeme.They easily had the best team but the "rest and rotation' policy put paid to their chances.I would also add,through no fault of their own,that SA had a pretty easy road to the final.Frankly,no team has had an easier ride in a WC.but like you,that's just my opinion. 2011 - yes,we were favourites,and nearly lost.Injuries happen,but I suspect a fully fit McCaw and an available Dan Carter in the final would have made it an easier win. So all up,I believe NZ were the best team in 1987,95 and 2011.We screwed up in 2007.At the rest we were never the favourites - none of those teams were in the running.
Jerry
Guest
You know nothing, John No.
fredstone
Guest
The limiting factor to this argument is the amount of referees of an acceptable standard produced by any of the three countries. Aus seems not to be doing any developement in that direction and can't even find sufficient players of an acceptable standard to fill all of their super rugby teams. NZ seems to have one maybe two sufficiently skilled operators. Which leaves us with the same quandry as the Springboks have to struggle through in every international match...a northern hemisphers ref with a completely different approach to the game because there simply is no other option.
Charging Rhino
Roar Guru
I dunno Buzzard, imo the only WC since 1991 where the All Blacks were the standout team was in 2011. And even then they almost lost the final. In 1995 the Boks went unbeaten the whole year, and won 15 or 16 games in a row. Just 10 days short of a full 2 years without being beaten. From 1994-1996. In 1999- Wallabies and Boks played the better rugby. ABs won the Tri- Nations, yes but the tide was turning in Aus favour after SA dominated 1998. And Aus continued the purple patch into 2000 and 2001. 2003- undisputed favorites were England, and they were rated as such. Maybe only in NZ were the ABs considered favorites. I reckon everywhere else people were banking on England. They'd beaten NZ in NZ and at home, thumped the Boks, beaten Aus and won in the final in Aus as well as the 6 Nations. They only lost a WC warmup game to France. It's a pity really because they would've gone 25 wins in a row against EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE from 2002 - 2004 had they not slipped up in a silly WC warmup match, maybe Woodward played a second string side? Also they only lost 1 game in 2001 and 1 in 2002. Amazing really. What a team. Absolutely brilliant record. Similar the current All Black streak. Imagine we played the WC last year and people suggested that any team other than the ABs were the favorites? Lol they'd get laughed at. Well England were THAT team in 2002-2003. 2007- In London (where I lived at the time) the talk was that NZ would choke again. And they did. Many others were talking up the Boks chances and peaking at the right time. And they won. However BEFORE the tournament NZ were the form team. Not during. Well that's opinion ;-)
richard
Guest
Both SA and NZ fielded weakened sides in that 3N.I wouldn't put too much store by Aus. victory that year.It is why going into the WC,I didn't rate the WBs chances.
Dirk
Guest
Quit being so precious tane. REAPER shouldn't be stirring you - its too easy to get a bite out of you, as it is with all kiwi's. Is insecurity a national trait or something? Just be grateful you won you 2nd WC cause until it's held in NZ again, you wont win another one.
Kuruki
Roar Guru
Craig Joubert blows the whole biased theory out the window, he killed the Stormers against the Chiefs. You can often witness a ref trying to hard not to look biased that he actually goes to far the other way, so i really do think it's in everyones best interest to have a neutral ref. I almost feel as if Refs sometimes try to impress by picking up on things that are barely there to prove to the boss they know the rule book. I think anything that is not clear and obvious or does not impact on the game to much should be left alone. Scrum collapses where the ball has reached the back should be play on, order the halfback to use it immediately, not safe? only an absolute idiot continues to push once a scrum has collapsed.
Rambo
Guest
Does anyone know if the Lions v Reds and Bulls v Sharks match is being televised in the UK? Thanks
Johnno
Guest
That wasn't funny R.E.AP.E.R, sorry poor taste.
R.E.A.P.E.R.
Guest
This is a classic quote: “The relationship between the Welsh and the English is based on trust and understanding. They don’t trust us and we don’t understand them.” – Former RFU supremo Dudley Wood on Anglo-Welsh relations.
R.E.A.P.E.R.
Guest
“Remember that rugby is a team game; all 14 of you make sure you pass the ball to Jonah.” – Fax to the All Blacks before the 1995 World Cup final.
R.E.A.P.E.R.
Guest
Did you hear NZ Post has just recalled their latest batch of stamps? They had photos of All Blacks on them & people couldn’t figure out which side to spit on...
Johnno
Guest
That was funny R.EA.P.ER., keep the laughs coming, irritate Tane more.
To be fair, he made himself look like a poor sport. ;)
Johnno
Guest
AB'S 2007 Tane whinging, back in your box!
Johnno
Guest
anyitme, you'll get used to Tane's comments they put you to sleep.