The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Time for more scrutiny of rugby referees

Roar Guru
31st May, 2011
11
1049 Reads

Stu Dickinson’s performance on the weekend has me asking an obvious question: why is the performance of a referee not assessed more systematically? Why not put an end to the kangaroo court and make public accountability official?

Firstly, I do not want this thread to be about Dickinson.

His performance was below par but certainly not a statistical outlier – all referees, like all players have bad days. Nor do I set out to bash referees.

In general, I think they do a tremendous service to the game – they love their rugby and are as integral to its success as chalk on the goal-line.

When a referee does put in a bad performance, instead of bloiating like Alan Jones on a climate change rant, we should instead take the opportunity to have an open and frank conversation about referees.

We should ask two simple questions: what do we expect in terms of performance and accountability and how should it be implemented? Referees would of course be entitled to ask: how much extra are you going to pay me?

Here are my thoughts to get the conversation started:

As is currently the case with many other professions, referees should have their performance measured qualitatively and statistically in an open and transparent manner.

Advertisement

Each week, a panel of referees, coaches, players and spectators (club members perhaps) should watch the tapes from games and evaluate the referee based upon a set of predetermined questions. Some would be quantitative, like missed/wrong penalties, forward passes etc.

Others would be more subjective and qualitative, e.g. control and flow of the game, and so on. The combined results would be collated into a final score and a ranking.

The matrix of questions as well as the final outcome would be public but naturally the answers given by each participant would be secret. The ranking would be used to assist the IRB in assigning responsibilities to games.

Perhaps a system could be developed to assign relative importance to a match considering factors like bearing on the finals etc. The higher ranking referees would get the higher ranking matches and potentially more match payments to boot.

For players, this kind of evaluation is nothing new. I suspect those of us who have never seen the inside of modern, professional rugby teams would have our minds boggled at the sophistication of performance monitoring. This technology and methodology is no doubt used to plan the undoing of other teams and – not doubt referees.

Richie McCaw has admitted to ‘getting to know his referee’ and adjusting his game to suit. No doubt he would give his own starring role in Sunday’s controversies a big cross mark even if his devoted fans do not see it that way.

If referees are an important part of the game – which surely they are – more sophistication should be applied to developing and measuring their professionalism.

Advertisement

As spectators, we should expect and demand the highest level of performance from our referees and reward those who deliver accordingly.

close