Our players and coaches are held publicly accountable for their actions, so why not officials?
Why is there this ‘closed door’ mentality by referee bodies? Surely they too should front up after matches and be quizzed over their on-field actions?
It would go some way towards everyone understanding the referee’s or TMO’s actions; why some rules were being enforced more pedantically than others.
It would also explain why refs from opposing hemispheres, who are operating under the same rules, interpret things differently.
The other advantage is that the fan would get to learn more about the referee and his personality, especially how he thinks and ticks. By including the TMO and assistant referees into the panel, it would allow a much better understanding as to the reasoning behind a decision and provide greater transparency.
It explain publicly what the hierarchy is during matches. Opening the doors to understanding defuses much of the vitriol aimed at officials.
The panel should have the option to decline replies to inappropriate questions and answer only questions about the game, how it was managed or how a rule was interpreted.
Naturally, there will be questions asking about calls considered to be mysterious, misinterpreted or misunderstood. A forthcoming explanation from the panel would overcome much of the finger pointing the refereeing team has to tolerate.
Currently, the referee associations and bodies have an attitude of neither confirming nor denying rulings that are made in games. Explanations for decisions that produce dire outcomes for teams and competitions are never heard.
Rugby is a professional business now and as a business, all members and board directors are required to provide shareholders with explanations for controversial actions.
It is time for the officials to remove the secret society syndrome, front up and deliver. Whether they believe it or not, they too are players in the game.
wardad
Guest
Look what happened to Joubert during the Brisbane test in 2012 vs the ABs ,constant criticism seemed to make him freeze up and he had what for him was a very poor game . Result was a very unsatisfying draw [ i preferred the 2011 game in Brizzie despite the loss ] where he seemed to play little or no advantage at all. for example .
Old Bugger
Guest
Probably small man, small mind, syndrome.......
Jack
Guest
Yeah Kaplan shouldnt be doing that in my opinion. He's so pompous and to what end? What good does it do to have an ex ref (who may or may not be as good as the current crop, he certainly implies he was the better practitioner) publicly criticising referees for what are often differences in interpretation?
kingplaymaker
Roar Guru
Sound like warbrother would be an accurate name too.
wardad
Guest
I once decked one of my own players for calling the ref a "c..t" .The player happened to be my brother but so was the ref and as the eldest it was up to me to call him that if needs be.
Bakkies
Guest
A lot of pot kettle in those arguments from Kaplan on that site
Bakkies
Guest
Mark Lawrence was treated worse than Dickenson. He didn't do anything wrong but was left off the 2011 RWC panel. Probably the best ref around at that time.
ClarkeG
Guest
And he will tell you it's SANZAAR policy I imagine.
Jack
Guest
There are lots of questions I would like to ask about refereeing but not specific to a individual games, such as: why are offside players waved back inside when they have already influenced the 9 s options? Compare this law enforcement to the scrims. When did the laws change to allow player competing at the breakdown to be tackled by players coming in from the side or tackled as they are about to join the ruck? Track Pocock on Saturday and you will see what I mean. Fans to have a right to have explanations of changes in refereeing interpretations from one game to another when we pay everyone's salaries.
Michael Warren
Roar Guru
Sorry. Making a comment but in wrong reply ! (Like refs, I get things wrong as well!)
Michael Warren
Roar Guru
I will mention your point when contacting him next. :)
Michael Warren
Roar Guru
Yes, to you here Wally. Players make the mistakes and are corrected by the adjudicators, but commentators need to remove the frosted glass between them and the playing field.
Michael Warren
Roar Guru
Scrum, I like the way your argument shows balance and I feel that your points are very valid.
Jack
Guest
they are held accountable, just not to hacks and trolls. If we have them walking into press conferences we'll end up with backwards and forwards about one play of the match, should there be a contentious decision, and that will be pointless.
Shop
Roar Guru
Yep, the Joubert case was another example where people should have accepted the decision and moved on. To throw him under the bus just caused massive controversy and whether it is intended or not, a panle discussion with the refs will just cause the same outcomes.
Rebel
Guest
Although Paddy's take was correct, he should never have thrown one of his refs under the bus. The bosses should never pander to aggrieved bodies.
Cornish
Roar Rookie
Well said, couldn't agree more.
Hello
Roar Rookie
Great post Peterk
Harry Jones
Expert
PeterK: 100% agree with this; awesome post.
Bakkies
Guest
The refs bosses have done it a couple of times and thrown the ref under the bus. The worst example is when Stuart Dickenson correctly penalised the ABs loosehead against Italy in Milan. Paddy O'Brien then fronted the media saying that the ref got it wrong then went around to the ABs hotel to apologise. Dickenson was taken off the panel soon after that.