I rather quite enjoyed some time off last week, the first real period of down time for me since probably late January.
For three days, it was patchy mobile reception and whatever Super Rugby score updates TV and radio news bulletins could fit into their timeframe.
And that also meant that as far as I was concerned, there were no issues with refereeing. If I wasn’t hearing about it, it mustn’t have happened.
While away, I managed to catch up on the final round Six Nations game between England and France at Twickenham. Only two months late, sure, but better late than never.
I’m very happy I did, because I finally got to see a famed and thoroughly entertaining game, with England winning 55-35 in a 12-try thriller. England weren’t able to bridge the 26-point differential gap they needed to claim the Six Nations title, but that didn’t make it any less of a game.
And nor did some curious officiating from Nigel Owens on the day. Owens is, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the best referees in the game. He has a very good ‘feel’ for the game, and is unparalleled, I think, in the way he addresses players and explains his decisions.
But there were numerous times in this game where I was rather surprised to see things missed, as the game was allowed to flow. So there were a few forward passes – some fairly obvious – some knock-ons, straight-ish lineout throws, and the like. Both teams benefitted, and again, the game certainly did not suffer as a result.
Whether it was a conscious decision from Owens on the day, we’ll never now, but it’s not difficult to conclude that in the final game of the tournament and with the title still in play, he was determined to let the players decide the outcome. I don’t have a lot of problem with this, if I’m honest.
When Billy Vunipola barged over in the 64th minute, converted by George Ford, England needed just eight more unanswered points to take the title. Owens, proving his quality, was in precisely the right spot to award the try immediately, with no collaboration with his assistants and no conversation with the TMO.
Except that Vunipola dropped it – or more precisely, had it prised loose from his grasp as he was falling to the ground over time line. Owens was maybe a metre away from all this, and the leg of French prop Rabah Slimani may have partially obscured him, but Owens looked to have a good enough angle on the play.
He just missed the knock-on, somehow. To say Vunipola was looking sheepish as he walked away is an understatement. It was the look of knowing, and surprisingly, there was very little argument from any of the French defenders involved.
Equally surprising was the lack of TMO correction after several replays, though to be fair Ford didn’t muck around with the conversion. Even Brian Moore in commentary had to eventually concede it was a clear knock-on. Eventually.
The point in all this is that even the very best referees in the game get things wrong on the field.
And I couldn’t help but think of this decisive two-month-old moment over this weekend just gone, when internet servers and Twitter itself began to strain under the load of referee-related anguish coming from all three corners of the SANZAR collective.
It’s fair to say there was much hand-wringing and desk-thumping in Round 14. Fault could be found in most if not all games played over the weekend, and from officials from all three countries.
Who was the worst? It’s hard to say, and doing so doesn’t really achieve anything. And there probably wouldn’t be consensus anyway.
Referees and the decisions they make are more scrutinised than ever before. Every moment in every game can be rewound, paused, reviewed, judged, and sentenced within moments of it happening live.
You may well have heard or read me saying in the past that I really try to ignore referees on the field, and I do. I watch rugby for the rugby, not the officials. But I’m still not immune to a rant.
Social media, internet forums, super-dooper-mega-ultra high definition TVs, and remote controls are all we need to make our feelings on any single decision known. And it happens every game, every weekend, all season.
So here’s the question for consideration.
Is refereeing really as bad as is being made out, or is the reality that it’s the same as it ever was but just magnified so much more?
It may well be the former; there have been some absolute howlers this season.
But I think the latter is also true, and it’s a classic case of confirmation bias.
We’re reading and hearing more and more that referees and the assistants and the TMOs are all hopeless, and so we watch their decision-making so much more closely to see for ourselves if it’s true. And then we rant about referees being rubbish, fulfil the prophecy, rinse, repeat, and tune in again the following week convinced that all refs are rubbish.
None of this is to excuse the obvious errors made on the weekend. But it is worth thinking about whether we might also be guilty of overemphasising things just a touch.
For everything that happened on the weekend, you can go back to Stuart Berry last year, to Bryce Lawrence in 2011, to Wayne Barnes in 2007, and however many more examples you care to recall. Referees have been wrong in the past, and they’ll be wrong next weekend, too. Until the robots take over, human whistleblowers will make mistakes.
Postscript: Though they didn’t refer to them directly in the media release, it was notable that SANZAR have appointed Rohan Hoffmann as an Assistant Referee only this weekend (in the Force-Highlanders game, to be refereed by Andrew Lees), and that TMOs George Ayoub and Vinny Munro weren’t appointed at all.
In the MR, SANZAR Game Manager Lyndon Bray said, “While we acknowledge that the match officials cannot get it right all of the time, there are some basic standards that have simply not been upheld over this past weekend, resulting in some disappointing decisions and selection consequences.”
Indeed.
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
It had nothing to do with the Tahs. I've spent the last couple of years in Sydney following them, so why would I have an anti-tahs rant?
Lindsay Amner
Roar Guru
Yep ta, memory plays tricks at my advanced age
Skepskop
Guest
Great post. If refs miss the odd infringement but still give both teams a fair chance at winning the game, then I say fair enough. Rugby is simply too complex to the reffed perfectly by one ref. Issues are created however when ref's blow one way for one team and another way for the other team.
Skepskop
Guest
You must be joking. Rohan Hoffman simply does not have what it takes to be a first class referee. It's not about him making a few mistakes, it's about him not understanding the laws to the correct level and not being able to control a game of rugby. If he is demoted and he works on these aspects and then comes back much improved then fair enough he must be given another chance but to say he is currently one of the best young refs is crazy. He is currently terrible.
Phil O'Donovan
Guest
George Ayoub was a shocking referee and continues to maintain this standard.
PeterK
Roar Guru
have you heard of subconscious bias, the ref would not realise he is being biased
PeterK
Roar Guru
OJ - True AB's have always been as cynical , it took professionalism for others to catch up somewhat.
Piru
Guest
been saying this for years
Red Menace
Guest
This debate is probably over but I'll put my 2 cents in anyway. A lot of the problems at the tackle area is because the positioning of the referee is too close, stand back a metre and you can actually see more....players coming in the side etc. Also, I used to constantly stand on the offside line at the ruck, defenders hindmost foot. Guess what, the players did as well. As for forward passes and knock on's, if in doubt play on. One thing I never tolerated was players whining in my ear. Dave Dennis' carry on over the Latu "punch/handbag" was poor but not as poor as Hoffman letting him continue to mouth off. Looking forward to seeing Marius van der Westhuizen referee this weekend....a very good young referee.
taylorman
Roar Guru
In fact I'd take it further. make a try worth 6 points where the try scorer goes over the line untouched. That would encourage these silly push over the line things that some teams are only capable of scoring. That is the sort of thinking we should be applying when resolving issues. Rather than trying to sort out the problem by blaming or marginalizing refs, create an opportunity to encourage movement of the ball away from those areas. I'm not saying remove great forward drive efforts to the line, because that is part and parcel of the game, I'm saying offer an alternative when they get there.
ClarkeG
Roar Guru
Bakkies.. without wishing to respond to your personal comments I will just simply re-emphasise my previous point that between the two of us I am the one that accepts and understands the official throw forward law and its application.
taylorman
Roar Guru
No, because that opens a new world for bias, interpretation and the like. One rule- the try was scored so that some human official, whether it be a ref or a TMO saw the actual try being scored- ie the ball, on the line, not appearing to be on the line, because in this case, it was not conclusive. It can be construed that Jameswn is happy purely, or at least partially because it was a Tah that scored. Where I, as a neutral saw it as inconclusive. How one 'feels' about that as an interpretation is irrelevant. There are at least two views, when there should only be one. Teams wear the risk of the possibility that if they score a try with bodies everywhere then it may not count.
RobC
Roar Guru
Thanks for the article Brett. Excellent topic. I look a the Ref like the weather. Not something that can be controlled, but hopefully something that the teams adjusted to. And doesnt always follow logic.
Taylorman
Guest
I agree, of any coach he takes decisions he thinks are against his sides worse than any. He might have a point but how he handles it is reckless, unprofessional and cynical. Favourite for the coaching red card this year.
Taylorman
Guest
Yes that's true, the Tahs having quite a good run in that respect, so they're due for a big fall in that area, just the percentages.
Taylorman
Guest
Disagree, I think you'd just have more incompetence, because incompetence is at the centre of it all. All you gain is that you can't argue that a ref was biased so you are left with incompetence as a default. no one can tell the difference between bias and incompetence because only the ref knows if he is actually favouring one side. Anything from there are assumptions, usually stronger ones from the losing side. And, in tournaments like the World Cup bias is still possible where one ref might prefer his own side to be facing a particular side next round. What better conditions can you have to be biased yet not be accused of it?
Bakkies
Guest
Which shouldn't occur, it's the equivalent of telling him how to do his job.
Bakkies
Guest
'The rugby law implies all that is in the league law just leaves it unstated. It does not need to. That is black and white.' It doesn't need to? So why is there so much debate about it that than?
Bakkies
Guest
'‘Bakkies’ you’re very quick to deflect from the issue which is unfortunate as, assuming I made the correct assumption on your position, you’re unlikely to ever grasp the correct application of the throw forward law.' What a pompous and arrogant response. I am not going to bother to respond to the rest of your comments in regards to this. Peter, interpretation is how it is being refereed which has led to incorrect decisions or letting them go. Whether you agree with or not. ARs aren't helping the refs by not communicating with refs or avoid making a decision.
Skepskop
Guest
As a saffa I have no issue with being reffed by NZ or Aus ref's, as long as they are competent. Hoffman is clearly not competent so he must go for that reason, not because he is an aussie reffing aussie games. We all moan about our teams or teams from our country getting the short end, the truth is is all evens out over time. All we need is the best referees reffing as much as possible regardless of where they come from.