Roar Guru
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.