Referees need support, not media criticism

Great to read that from a referee at the highest level. This needs to be drummed into your top colleagues in group discussions aimed at maintaining integrity, competence and consistency in refereeing. This a slightly edited comment I made (far too late) on an article (25 July 2016) by Spiro Zavos criticising Stephen Larkham's complaints against Angus Gardner: “Coaches should not call out referees with the accusation that they lost the game for their team. … It was five years later [than 2007] before Henry actually detailed his objections to a litany of decisions made against the All Blacks by the English referee, Wayne Barnes.” This is not a fair and accurate comparison of Larkham’s ["not OK"] and Henry’s ["OK"] respective criticisms of referees’ decisions. Simply because Larkham’s criticism was immediate and Henry’s substantially delayed does not give Henry the high moral ground. That is particularly so as, in 2012, Barnes was – and remains today – an international referee at the highest level, including World Cup matches. In any match featuring the All Blacks since 2007 refereed – or about to be refereed – by Barnes there has inevitably been speculative commentary concerning how he might perform given the especially strident complaints of the New Zealanders. That speculation and commentary was no less than usual before and after the 2016 Rugby World Cup Final between the All Blacks and the Wallabies, in which Barnes was a touchline referee. It will be recalled that the All Blacks were able to gain early momentum and consequentially set the Wallabies on the back foot with a penalty goal by the failure of Barnes to call out a blatant All Black forward pass, despite being specifically asked for his view by referee Nigel Owens (who seemed to have been near enough to the action to pick it up or double-check himself). While some praise that type of loose refereeing as “letting the game flow” (which Owens is alleged to favour), it is a poor example for rugby’s top referees to set.Only Wayne Barnes can tell us whether the vociferous complaints from the Kiwi brigade over the years had any conscious or subconscious influence on his lenient policing of the forward pass, but even so his casual conduct opened him to criticism on that ground. Particularly in a World Cup where the stakes of finance and national prestige are so high - but in any sporting contest amateur or professional - the game has to be played according to the rules. Scrupulously competent and impartial refereeing is vital to that cause. Without it you get a sense of injustice which diminishes confidence in and enjoyment of the game. Scoring or gaining a territorial advantage without throwing the ball forward is a matter of basic rugby skill as much as any other, and has to be refereed accordingly.

Mistakes are so blatant now it's as if the decision on who wins is made before the game starts. An investigation into referees should be held and rules on the video ref should be changed mistakes seem to be worse since Gallop left maybe the fault lies elsewhere and not with referees?

WHAT? You want to start negotiations with more refs. You rorters are so greedy. Isn't $hayme enough?

Conor, Your straight thinking is always a pleasure. You are Moore Park material. As a matter of interest, which code, NFL or NRL is the most attractive as betting medium? Does standard of refereeing play an influence? Many Thanks, MAX

"I have two sons that are referees" - there must be some sort of support group for that...! Just kidding Cads it's big of you to admit. The problem is that refs are human in a highly physically, mentally and emotionally draining environment trying to make decisions on the run, with poor vies of what going on and players trying to get away with whatever they can. It's almost no win. The only way the problem will stop is if players, coaches, fans and the media stop complaining and whinging whenever a decision goes against them, cop it on the chin and get on with it. Old school values

The way the rules are written contributes greatly to this. There are so many grey areas which require interpretation. Anyone who has read my articles knows I put a lot of NFL references in because I watch that, NFL has its problems but there are few grey areas, and it is usually up to how a referee sees the play, as opposed to he simply made a bad call. Every now and then some freak play will happen and there will be no rule for it, so they go and make an exact ruling. They even have written into plenty of the rules "if in doubt, it is a X", as in if the call is in doubt here is what you do. If two refs see a play differently, that means there is doubt, and so they have only one course of action.

A year or two ago, the NFL and their referees had a pay disagreement and replacement college refs were in. College rules and NFL rules do differ, a lot of things are the same but there are plenty of areas where there is a major difference. It was an absolute clusterf#$k to put it lightly. It was a disaster, they didn't know the rules, they didn't know how to enforce it, there were missed calls everywhere. Sacking the top officials is probably the worst idea, you think it is bad now, wait until you see a whole bunch of guys who have never worked at this level step up.

My favourite "Joey, now Joey, Joey Joey, calm down now Joey." Way too familiar there. I'd say last names are acceptable, maybe first names for the captain, but no nicknames.

"The ref is meant to blow a penalty if he sees one. His job is NOT to allow for a free-flowing game. The players just need to not break the rules." you are spot on turbo but lot's of people blame refs for giving penalties - the players can do no wrong but apparently the ref can

"Too many penalties ....." that's the players fault not the refs. The refs just police the rules, it's the players that have to follow them

I think if the same player gives away three penalties in one match they should get 10 in the bin. And when a team concedes 8 (or whatever floats your boat) penalties the player who gave away the 8th penalty goes to the bin, and anything deemed serious enough to warrant being put on report should be considered for a sin bin. Backchat should remain a ten metre march though should be used more often, and anymore backchat after the march and you're binned.

Agree. Way more send offs required. The sin bin and the quick tap. If refs got these two things right then we would have more discipline and more consistency

Well I think that the NRL are the best officials in the world. They have a complex game to adminster with bodies in motion and at a fast pace and get it right most of the time. Try watching some other sports and tell me who does it better? For those of you who think that they are bad let me make a couple of points 1. They are human beings and guess what we all make mistakes 2. Most of the critics target calls by the ref that are judgmental in nature rather than if the ruling is correct or not 3. If a great player has a bad game - it is just one of those nights. If a ref does it then he is incompetent and an idiot 4. The constant criticism that offers not solutions does no more than drive potential great referees away And he is the final challenge for all you critics - if you think you know better why dont you go an get your ref's certificate and show us all how it is done? Up for the challenge - doubt it as most of you probably lead a life that is devoid of achievement and it is easier to knock someone rather than offer any real solution.

The referees are trying to show a human side and not been seen as people who police the rules, and in the wash up of that, players have become too familiar with them. Lets get back to policing the rules correctly and consistently, no matter what. Instead of calling names call numbers, dehumanise the process. Get the videa cams off them immediately. That puts them under pressure to explain everything. Make the captain wear a big wide arm band to easily identify them, then police the rule that the captain and the captain only can talk to the referee. If the captain goes off, put the arm band on the acting captain. Any talk, banter or questioning decisions apart form the captain should result in an immediate penalty. If repeat offender during that game, 10 minutes in the bin. Any question of the ref's integrity or honesty by any player (captain included) should result in a send off. Watch the game clean up from the player bullying the referee then. Coaches willsoon put a clamp on the loose cannons lips and demand disclipine. The rules need to be administered withour dissent. The incidents of Boyd's intimidation and Sandow's cheat comment are a blight on the game, and if they are allowed to continue, the game and its audience will suffer.

I think it's about attitude as much as anything else. The reffing as a whole these days is no better or worse than it has been in the 30-odd years I've been watching footy. Every now and then you get a very good ref but the overall quality is the same. There's greater line of sight on refs decisions. How often do you watch something with six replays from four angles and a super slow-mo and then say "gee the ref got that one wrong." We're also in an era when coaches can get sacked six games into a season. It's almost par for the course for a coach to blame a ref after a loss. What else does he say?

Harrigan without meaning to be has been part of the problem. He was able to ref by blowing so few penalties because the players knew he was the boss and if they stepped out of line he was going to penalise them, bin them, etc so they almost self policed. refs now try to adopt that style but without the respect and players push the boundaries as far as they can.