The rep weekend has come and gone, with only one more year to come around in its current format. And again, just like clockwork, the calls have gone out to revert to the pre-2009 single referee model of officiating.
Those people have forgotten what the game became prior to the introduction of a second on-field referee in 2009. The ruck speeds were terribly slow, leading to a grinding arm-wrestle style of play in many matches.
Defence was king, and any attacking flair was left in the change room as the desperation for banking two competition points outweighed any desire to entertain.
It wasn’t always this way. Do you remember who won the NRL grand final in 2005?
If you guessed the North Queensland Cowboys, you were wrong (they finished as beaten grand finalists). If you guessed the Wests Tigers, you win a cookie.
Both those teams played similar styles of football with long passes out the back set up by creative play out of dummy half from Aaron Payne and Robbie Farah. It was terrific to watch.
In fact leading up to the preliminary finals you could have just about written your own ticket with the bookies to see those two teams contesting the premiership.
Teams one and two were Parramatta and St George Illawarra who had both enjoyed a week off. The Tigers and Cowboys had finished four and five and while the most optimistic of fans were hopeful of an upset, only the deluded would have expected two.
Yet that’s how it happened. The Tigers defeated the Dragons and the Cowboys defeated the Eels, finishing with a 30 to 16 victory to the Tigers in the grand final.
That off-season, leading into the 2006 season, the referees and a lot of pundits expected other teams to copy the Tigers’ attacking style.
However, it went the other way. If teams couldn’t match the likes of Benji Marshall and Scott Prince with the ball, then they needed to find another way to counter it.
Enter the ‘wrestle’.
Coaches decided to stifle attacking play by controlling the ruck, winning the tackle and denying the opposition time to use the football. They did this through using martial arts-style techniques to lock the ball carrier so he could not escape the tackle until the tackler released him.
Melbourne Storm is usually held up as the pioneers of this but plenty of other clubs were doing the same thing.
It seemed to work. An average of 46.9 points were scored per match in 2005. This slumped to 43.4 per match in 2006 and 42.5 per match in 2007. In two years we had seen a 9 per cent drop in the number of points scored each game. Attack was beginning to be strangled out of the game.
The NRL needed to do something about it. As always, the coaches were a step ahead of the lawmakers and they needed to try to keep up.
A big part of controlling the tackle is locking a player in discretely, giving an illusion of genuine movement when demanded by the referee and often feigning being tangled with the ball carrier.
Players will also lever up off the tackled player (for example pushing down on the calf muscle as the tackler gets to his feet) and myriad other ways of slowing down the play the ball.
Introducing a second official on the park, or the ‘pocket’ referee, gave the officials much better vision of what was going on in the tackle. Slowly – and it took a couple of years – the players had to adjust to the presence of the pocket ref.
Eventually we got the results we wanted, as the speed of the play the ball increased overall. One measure used by the referees was provided by a sports statistics company. The number of fast, neutral and slow plays of the ball were recorded. From 2009 to 2010 the fast stat rose by 40 per cent.
Nowadays we see the wrestle not on the ground but in the defenders holding the ball carrier off the ground, eventually putting him on the ground at the last possible moment. That’s another story.
But back to the rep weekend where we saw one referee officiating the Australia versus New Zealand Test on Friday night and two pulsating games from four of the Pacific Nations on Saturday.
Whether you realise it or not, all of those games would have benefitted from a second referee. The Anzac Test was played a lot like an NRL game.
On Friday night New Zealand really pushed referee Gerard Sutton in the ruck. This resulted in several ruck penalties for holding down. A pocket referee, while not necessarily speed things up in any one game, would have provided a presence there for the players to release more quickly.
That referee would have also been able to tip Gerry on who the main culprits were (which happens in every NRL game every week).
As for Saturday’s games, the ruck speed wasn’t a concern as the carnival-like football was more indicative of a one-off match. The Pacific teams played in the most entertaining fashion and using the ball was far more important than controlling the ruck.
There are many instances were another set of eyes results in more accurate decisions. That is the case in all NRL matches. Except we had an unnecessary stoppage and potential scuffle in the Samoa versus Tonga game when Samoa’s Kirisome Auva’a was kneed by Tonga centre Solomene Kata.
Auva’a took offence to it and, finding no intervention forthcoming from officials, took matters into his own hands, which in the old days would have erupted into an all-in brawl.
The pocket referee would have had a perfect angle to view the indiscretion and would have stepped in immediately. We would have had a penalty and got on with the game.
Of course we might not have seen Kata give Auva’a a hug in reconciliation, but that night provided flair and highlights you wouldn’t see in a season of rugby union matches. I don’t think we would have missed it.
Red Dog
Guest
Ya never gunna keep em all happy Dan .
rebel
Guest
Mycall, not that I agree with you, but if he phrased it the way you did then at least it would be more credible than the throw away line he did use. You at least backed up the comment. I'm not here to point out where it is wrong as code wars are a waste of time.
Noel
Guest
If you or anyone else suggest that the one referee was the cause of the introduction of the the wrestle , you have rocks in your head . The point is too inane to argue . The refereeing on the weekend was supurb , even the bunker behaved itself . Great weekend of footty .
Mycall
Guest
The front rower scoring from dummy half is selfish high risk play. It came off on this ocassion but in the NRL it usually wouldn't. It's the sort of play that Gallen and co. have been criticised for in the past and rightly so. Props aren't generally the people you want making 5th tackle decisions for the team.
Mycall
Guest
There is some relevance because one of his key arguments for 2 referees is that it speeds up the stoppages in the game, making it a better spectacle. A spectacle that attracts the pacific nations audience whose attention is normally on rugby union. Arguably, the pacific nations countries prefer open, expansive rugby (league and union) and whilst union is more popular, on this one ocassion, they got a season's worth of highlights. With 2 refs, we wouldn't have seen one of game's highlights in the Auva'a Kata hug but there was enough spectacle in the rest of the match that the 2 refs wouldn't have spoiled the game.
Sylvester
Guest
The main issue with a single ref in the test was blatant offside play while he was patrolling the ruck. The Kiwis were already having enough trouble scoring without the Aussies 2-3 metres offside while defending their line (I'm sure it was both side but there were more telling wide camera angles on the Aussie line).
Dan Eastwood
Expert
Cool - some people have been telling me I've been too defensive today. Back to anecdotes and no facts next week!
Red Dog
Guest
I have read some of your pieces Dan . My intention was not to offend , it was tongue in cheek .
Chris Morrison
Guest
One referee is much better. The game flows under one persons interpretations as opposed to two. You get half the penalties and more consistency in the penalties awarded. I do call for one referee and I do remember what the game was with one referee. I loved it. What is wrong with having a defensive struggle? The best games in the past few years have been the lowest scoring games. What about that cracker Roosters vs Manly game it finished at 6-4 or something like that. Manly vs Souths this year was another defensive struggle of a match and was another cracker. You argue that the ruck was slower. I argue so what? It's far better to have a slightly slower play the ball then to have inconsistent ruck penalties where sometimes the player has barely hit the ground and the referee is blowing the whistle for too long in the tackle even though there has been 55 tackles in the game that the ruck speed was the exact same or slower and not penalised. It's just rubbish and inconsistent.
Griffo
Guest
Just on your point about upsets in the 2005 preliminary finals, my recollection was that the Cowboys winning over Parramatta was a mach bigger upset than the Tigers beating the Dragons. Wests were the form team going into the finals in year without great standouts and they beat the Cowboys by 50 points in the first week. The Cowboys on the other hand was big surprise, made even more extraordinary by the 29-0 scoreline.
Michael Keeffe
Roar Guru
I don't really care if there is one or two ref. What I do care about is the ref coaching the players all the time. Seriously they coach more than refs and coaches do for my son's under 7 side. These are professional footy players and I have had enough of them waiting until the pocket ref says move. Or a player is clearly offside and the ref calls him out. The player knows if he is offside or not but by being there he has already influenced the attack. Just penalize him and he'll stop doing it. It drives me insane, these are professional footy players. If they don't know when to get off the player or how to stay onside they'll soon learn after they are penalized.
rebel
Guest
Sorry, I just noticed the 'your code' comment. Actually I am capable of following and enjoying more than one code. I don't identify myself by a code of sport and I don't feel the need to belittle any sport.
ClarkeG
Guest
Ok Womblat - So what. Why would he be amazed if he is a regular follower of the game. If time in play is the measure then why would anyone ever go to a rugby union match or an american football match or a cricket match or a baseball game.
Dan
Guest
Use of data is interesting. Average points per game across seasons averaged 39 in the 90s, then averaged in 42 in the 00s, and is hovering around 41 for the first half of this decade. The average points per game in 2005 looks more like an outlier than an indication of a trend. Reduction of points seems to be more of a normalisation after deviation.
rebel
Guest
Womblat, I don't need to do it, I know the ball is in play more in league, although not by as much as you think. I don't care and we could do similar things in a league match. The point is this article is about two referees in Rugby League, not what code is better. We could be here back and forth arguing and pointing different things out but that is exactly what we are trying to avoid. Pretty simple really.
Bryan
Guest
I think exciting football and refs are very complicated factors. One, Professionalism in some ways ruins games. It is a lot easier to prevent points being scored by dubious tactics and pushing the limits. In the end, all coaches, players, trainers rely upon winning for their income for their families. And they are always going to push the limits wherever they can to improve that, and be damned the results of the spectacle. Two, more points do not always mean a better game. A grinding hard game with some great trysavers can be far more epic than a 40-30 scoraton. You cannot make the game too easy to score, otherwise it becomes meaningless. Three, I do not think faster play the ball is the be all and end all of a better game. Sure it helps, but I think you are putting the cart before the horse. We want players willing to chance their arms, have a crack. By making the play the ball quicker, the defense is a little bit more broken, giving incentive to chance their arms more. But their are other ways to do that. Reduce the advantage a kick can make (30m+ gain compared to a decent 5 tackles of 50m+) (why is a kick almost worth the same as the first 5 rucks?, Rugby is about running with the ball not kicking it aka football) Reduce the incentive of completion rates. 2 refs can improve things, and a well reffed game is never put up in lights, only badly reffed ones. This can make it feel like there is only badly reffed games. But no matter how many refs, bunkers or whatever are around, there will always be controversy, and deep down, thats how we like it. Otherwise what would we speak about on Monday morning? Quick note of professionalism.. in the woman's Australia vs Kiwis game, on the 5th tackle, a Kiwi front rower pushed the half out of the way and picked up the ball and went for the line herself. She made it, and scored a great try, especially due to the 5th. That sort of play would never ever happen in the mens game, because any front rower even thinking about it would never play again.
Dan Eastwood
Expert
You seem to be very well informed. I don't even have NRL notices going back to 2001! It wasn't my intention to deliberately mislead anyone with stats. I used the pre-2009 information to illustrate why a change was needed. The evidence provided to coaches and the NRL also included heart rate zones over the 80 minutes. The two ref model has changed as well. We still haven't won the battle of the ruck v the players and coaches. The standing tackle is the one that now takes a lot of time.
Womblat
Guest
OK rebel, then take this from someone who is ambivalent about your code. Pick a Union game, and run a stopwatch over it. Not the time standing round, waiting for scrums, forming line outs, or during penalties while the normal clock is running. Measure the time the ball is actually in players hands and tackles are being made. I did it the other day and it was less than 25 minutes. The whole match. Don't take my word for it. Do it yourself. Make sure you're accurate. You'll be amazed.
Dan Eastwood
Expert
The guys all come through the grades controlling matches on their own, so they would love to do NRL games on their own. Having said that, they all understand the benefits of having the pocket ref there. Not just for helping in the ruck , but taking up a position on the 10m after a change of possession and a long break, adjudicating at the scrum while senior ref is with the defence etc.
rebel
Guest
So jimmmy, you would be happy for this article to be bogged down with people arguing from both sides that the statement is either true or not instead of the topic of two referees being discussed. Of course it is an opinion, and he is entitled to it, but the opinion was not backed up with any facts to support it and can be easily disputed. Most people are sick of the code war pieces and decided to express this point rather than delve into one. Apart from the fact it is not true, the comment wasn't necessary in the context of the article, almost half of the comments are already not on topic because of it. We are not telling him not to voice his view, just when it would be appropriate in relation to context.