- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
We hear a lot about refereeing errors leading to results that could or should have been different, but who is making the biggest noise? And, is the noise justified?
Another interesting part of the process is whether the noise is loud enough to go into the annuls of rugby history, such as the famous Waratah penalty goal in the 2014 Super Rugby final, given as a result of a penalty awarded against Richie McCaw.
The referee Craig Joubert apparently admitted that he was wrong, and so the Crusaders supporters, and New Zealand supporters generally, as well as Waratah-hating supporters, have raised the level of noise around the decision into the stratosphere.
All rugby watchers know that decisions of that sort happen potentially many times a match and in most matches. So, was it unfair? Or just part of the rugby spectrum?
Another element of the noise factor is the potential to drown out competitive noise, which, in the case of the 2014 Super Rugby final came mostly from the Nemani Nadolo try, which had the genuine appearance of being ‘foot-in-touch’, yet was awarded anyway.
This event is little heard of now, just one year on, yet the McCaw penalty apparently robbed the Crusaders of the title.
Obviously those supporters of teams who have apparently suffered make a lot of the noise, but as I mentioned there is a strong element among the rugby fraternity of supporting the team that they hate the least. I think that is a phenomenon that transcends all team sports.
So, those groups of haters are big generators of noise as well, and sometimes the largest. It depends how widespread is the angst against a team, and in the Waratahs’ case, if The Roar is a bellwether of opinion, the spread is very wide indeed.
Another body of opinion supports the view that refereeing decisions, both right and wrong, sort themselves out to even up over time. But how long does it take to even up, if it occurs at all? Most seem to think that a match result can be altered by refereeing decisions, but over a number of matches the referees correct their obvious mistakes and can so produce a fairer result.
There is also a statistical implication that winning a few close matches has a good chance of being followed by a close loss or a loss anyway, because the team’s luck must run out. But does it work that way? Or should it anyway? Teams in form tend to make their own luck and win the tight ones through confidence and belief.
A common theme among the ‘we wuz robbed’ brigade is that certain things that ‘may have’ occurred are raised to the level of ‘would have’ occurred. An example is the 2015 Super Rugby Round 12 match between the Brumbies and Waratahs in Canberra, where a number (four, I think) of penalties were awarded to the Brumbies in the second half which were in kickable, though difficult, positions. The Brumbies went for their rolling-maul try tactic instead and failed, scoring nothing.
What if they had had four shots at goal instead? Twelve points to the Brumbies, and a win sealed by nine. The assumption here is that the Brumbies kicker, Christian Lealiifano, would have kicked them all even though they were from difficult positions. The Brumbies captain chose to go for the try instead, which could either have indicated a lack of confidence in his kicker, or over-confidence in getting his rolling-maul try.
What if the first penalty was a goal attempt, and a miss? Maybe the next would then be more likely to be a try attempt. A fail, and then what?
The point that is most glossed over in these scenarios is that actions have consequences, and a particular action will generate a different set of possible scenarios than an alternative action.
If the first penalty was a successful penalty goal, then it’s back to halfway for a Waratahs kick-off. Perhaps the Waratahs then recovered the ball and so had possession in the Brumbies’ half. The Brumbies infringe in desperate defence and a penalty goal to the Waratahs ensues, nullifying the Brumbies previous three points.
The Waratahs may not get a penalty kick, but the action is still in the Brumbies’ half or halfway, and in a separate part of the field to the area where the Brumbies were earning their four penalties. So, in essence, the four penalties can be looked at as having been earned in the pursuit of one successful scoring opportunity, and not four.
The TMO has been earning some attention this week, with both George Ayoub (Waratahs versus Shorks) and Vinnie Munro (Hurricanes versus Chiefs) earning the ire of SANZAR and being dropped to the bench. The logic is that the TMO has the technology to review what he wants at slow/fast speeds and must therefore come up with the correct answer.
Because they were dropped, the assumption can only be that SANZAR agrees with the critics and thought they were both wrong. The Nadolo try in the 2014 Super Rugby final was the last match, so maybe the TMO was acquitted for that reason.
TMOs are getting into the action to assist with decisions on potential foul-play, and other areas. Invariably they influence the decision, and in many cases appear to make it, but is that logical? There are two assistant referees on the sidelines already there to assist.
We accept that referees will make errors but often the TMO can change the referee’s opinion even though the referee can see the replay footage on the screen just as the TMO sees it. Wayne Barnes the English referee is a shining light, I think, on how the TMO should be mostly treated – as a replay technician with no input to on-field decision-making. Barnes makes the call himself after seeing the replay, so backs his own judgement.
The TMO is wonderful theatre, though, but it can get overdone and perhaps too often in recent times.
The laws of the game of rugby are complicated because it’s more a game of chess than a game of draughts. It’s Test cricket versus One-Day. With the complexities of the game come the complicated rules, and so the many and varied ways of interpreting them. If the rules are dumbed down then the direction moves towards rugby league.
I think it’s the complexities that make rugby great. The refereeing disagreements are just part of the fun.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.