Numerous scientific studies are unequivocal – referees are biased.
Subject to involuntary, subconscious opinions and feelings, as well as the influences of the local crowd and their own natural blind spots to bias, referees can’t help themselves.
Which begs the question, why does SANZAR think its referees are immune to very human failings?
Despite the research, SANZAR chief executive Greg Peters is on record as implying that SANZAR referees are somehow above the very real human frailties that dog us all:
“We’ve taken the view that it is more important to have the best referee rather than a neutral referee,” he said.
Further, to suggest that referees of any particular nationality – whether New Zealand, Australian or South African – can be relied on to be neutral when refereeing a contest featuring his countrymen, just doesn’t stack up. There is a mountain of evidence that proves bias is a natural human flaw that we are all subject to.
There’s research out there and almost all of it points to bias. A lot of the research is football related, but the main elements – a ball, a crowd and a subjective decision maker – are the same. Here are some of the points the research raised.
1. Referees use crowd noise as a cue or tool to help them make decisions
The study, Crowd noise as a cue in referee decisions contributes to the home advantage concluded that home crowd noise has a massive impact on officials who use the crowd’s response as a cue, or tool, in their decision making.
As a result, visiting teams mostly get the raw end of the deal:
“We propose that crowd noise correlates with the criteria referees have to judge. As crowd noise is a valid cue, referee decisions are strongly influenced by crowd noise. Yet, when audiences are not impartial, a home advantage arises.
“For example, Downward and Jones (2007) reported a similar trend for crowd size and number of yellow cards awarded against the away team. They analysed 857 games of the Football Association Cup in England and found that 1.71 first yellow cards were awarded toward away teams, whereas only 1.35 cards were awarded toward home teams; again, a highly significant difference.”
2. Nationalistic bias
Spiro Zavos cited similar research recently, in which researchers from Cambridge University’s Judge Business School and Heythrop College, University of London, Dr Lionel Page and Dr Katie Page did a study of 92 matches in the then Super 14, and also rugby league’s Super League series, between 2006 and 2009.
They concluded that referees are biased.
The researchers found that teams won just 38 per cent of matches “when the referee was from the nationality of the opposition, but 91 per cent of matches when the referee was the same nationality as the home team” – that’s all teams, all nationalities.
Where I disagree with Spiro is his intimation that only South African referees suffer from this malaise.
“It will be fascinating to see whether this Sharks style can create victories in New Zealand and Australia. Jake White’s Springboks were virtually unbeatable in South Africa (like the Sharks) but extremely vulnerable, except in France in Rugby World Cup 2007, outside of South Africa,” he wrote.
Well, that question has been answered to some extent. But either way, nationalistic bias is common to all nationalities.
What happens when the TMO has a conflict of nationality? We have already seen enough TMO blunders to know that technology isn’t the panacea we hoped it would be.
3. Bias blind spots
Emily Pronin, a social psychologist from Princeton University’s Department of Psychology, points to what she calls a bias blindspot.
“Displays of cognitive and motivational bias are inevitable products of the way we all see and understand the world. Perceptions and accusations of bias in others, coupled with denial of bias in self, are similarly inevitable,” says Dr Pronin.
This means that when we are trying to judge our own objectivity we have to rely on introspection, which is inaccurate and coloured by subconscious opinions and beliefs. When we judge the bias of others, we rely on their actions to reach a conclusion – a far more accurate measure.
This means that we, fans, Roarers and rugby writers, do not recognise our own bias. We cannot analyse or understand it – we are blind to our own bias.
Fans will always see the call going in favour of their team. We expect that our team will win. In short, “a ‘fan’ could be defined as someone with an expectation bias,” according to Blinds Spots and Biases, How Hidden Forces Shape Your Decisions.
How long can SANZAR ignore the science? The silence since Spiro’s article, and the one that inspired it – from the Australian‘s Wayne Smith – has been deafening.
But this is where I would go one further, and I can hear the howls of outrage already. We need completely neutral referees from countries outside of SANZAR – even from the UK if necessary.
In fact, why can we not have an academy where men and women from all nationalities go to be trained and turned out as professional referees, available to turn up where they are needed? Neutral, professional and without any baggage. Career men and women.
Sports academies are national institutions by necessity, they are there to turn out national sportsmen and women, but we don’t need to follow the same formula with referees.
Peter
Guest
Andrew Lees somehow seems to miss knock ons, Forward passes, wrong entry to scrum, but amazingly sees the small things like, minuscule things. He has to be the worst "ref" alive today! Why are there no video ref's to counter brainless "ref's" like Andrew Lees? So frustrating!!!
David Baker
Guest
PeterK - The reality is that all countries have their share of whiners. SA have more supporters than the other 2 so they have more whiners. If I had to generalise I find the Kiwis the best sports. Then again its easy to be a good sport when you win. After 2007, 1995 and others they did complain a lot. Refs and Chefs (-;
PeterK
Guest
David of course not, but what an outrageous statement from Bopchop that there is never any whinging about refs in SA except for 2 cases , so if he puts that out there then I will raise that with the fan who runs on the field to attack a ref.
David Baker
Guest
Come on PeterK So the actions of what drunk idiot define a nation? Of course having said that Bopchop is also generalising something horrible
PeterK
Guest
yeh right, this from the country where spectators run on the field and attack the ref.
David Baker
Guest
Our SA commentators showed a lack of knowledge of the rules. IF it was knocked out of the lions players hands then the try was correct as OBrien said. But if the ball was lost as a result of the tackle then knock on Since there is doubt (and I don't think it is as black or white as bray says) I go with No Try
Anto
Guest
No try: http://www.superxv.com/video/lions-v-blues-rd5-2014-try-incorrectly-awarded-super-rugby-video/lions-v-blues-rd5-2014-try-incorrectly-awarded-super-rugby-video-video_a082f53d7.html
Yogi
Guest
I am over Berry. It took a while though. Never any whinging about refs in SA?? After the RWC Laurence received death threats from SA and was heavily critisized in the media by the boks coach and captain. In 2012 he was still a Super rugby ref but he couldn't go to SA for fear of his personal safety. We don't think much of Stuart Berry as a ref but he would be safe walking down a street in Brisbane.
Jerry
Guest
"Both Bryce and the IRB apologised to SARU for that game and importantly the Samoa game, where those okes were throwing punches in the hope one if ours would retaliate. Blatant and wires than the QF, but as the boks won it wasn’t an issue…" I recall Broussow flopping like Bill Laimbeer to get Paul Williams sent off for an open handed shove, so I dunno why any SA fan would feel hard done by from the Samoa match. As for that apology - I can't recall the IRB apologising to SA at all, care to link to any evidence of that?
Bopchop
Guest
The truth. Read it. http://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/opinion/9175065/Reason-Springboks-too-nice-for-their-own-good Get over Berry. You realise that there is never any whingeing here about refs, EXCEPT for the polite and Lawrence incidents. Nothing during SR, even though we could. I'm afraid horwill typifies the petulant child sportsman that is so prevalent in Aus. Ben mowen much more of a role model.
Yogi
Guest
Bok Chop. Talking about blind spots... Bryce Laurance and the IRB never officially apologised to anyone except in the dreams of one eyed south africans. I was at the game and I can tell you there were no refereeing howlers, just marginal calls that went to the wallabies. The wllabies had been the better team all year, beating SA twice and winning the tri-nations. And their defence was unbelievable. It was 3 years ago. Get over it.
PeterK
Guest
Note true at all. Kiwis constantly whinged about D.i.c.kinson being biased, and Aussies whinged about Bryce Lawrence being biased when they reffed their own countries teams in super rugby. Both with good cases of bias IMO.
Bopchop
Guest
Exactly and back at ya. The blind spot to angus Gardiner, Bryce and the resulting "dry your eyes" response is EXACTLY what perpetuates things...
Bopchop
Guest
Both Bryce and the IRB apologised to SARU for that game and importantly the Samoa game, where those okes were throwing punches in the hope one if ours would retaliate. Blatant and wires than the QF, but as the boks won it wasn't an issue...
Tah Man
Guest
LD151 I think you will find it was Larkham complaining about the inconsistent refereeing in the Brumbies/Cheetahs match. In fact if you saw Mowens post match interview he was glowing in his praise for the Cheetahs. I thought that there were inconsistencies with the Ref and Touchies particularly the 77 min crooked lineout call the first of the game. The scrum penalties against Sio, Strauss should have been binned for a cynical play stopping the Brumbies from scoring as the ref had set the tone by carding Fardy at the 15 min mark. Willie's first try should have ben looked at by the TMO as it appeared to be 2/3 metres forward and the ref missed a blatant forward pass when the Cheetahs launched an attack. In saying all that I thought Cheetahs were better team and well deserving of the win and Mowen praised them for that.
Bopchop
Guest
You realise of course that Berry was not stood down? He got sanzar's thumbs up. Not the press' of course, but he was not found culpable and therefore continued with his scheduled games. Lourens vd merwe was stood down along with one Aussie and the Argie. But Berry is so deflated from the media criticism that he ignored multiple infringements in the sharks highlanders game, which the sharks lost. Lots of off the ball stuff from the highlanders right in front of him. So we've suffered from the bleating
Bopchop
Guest
Congratulations! You have just discovered your blind spot! Watch that quarter final again, the breakdowns, and if you still hold that view you and your fellows are in the minority.
Bopchop
Guest
100%
Bopchop
Guest
You're right. The reds have shown ever since the quality they're made of and the raw deal they hot against the lions. Kak man. They were offside all game and should have had another three okes in the bin. And by the way the analysis of that try showed it was a try, and confirmed by paddy o brien. But I guess that didn't make it into the news over there?
Bopchop
Guest
As is Angus Gardiner. Penalty tries, ignoring the tmo, etc. we just haven't bleated as much as you would have, had one of the Aussie teams been on the receiving end. And the ref in the sharks crusaders? At the end he may as well just have told the scorers to add some Saders points. Without that cooper try there would have been some penalty given that would have landed the history for the home side. Completely neutral refs in the perfect world. Because if the bulls are playing the stormers and a loss would mean the force progress, an Aussie ref is similarly biased.