Improving referee quality

NRL and other Australian Rugby League Discussion
User avatar
Tiger Steve
Member
Member
Posts: 1200
Joined: Wed 29 Mar, 2017 5:30 pm
Location: Chatswood West

Re: Improving referee quality

Post by Tiger Steve » Mon 11 Jun, 2018 10:12 pm

We are searching for perfection when it doesn’t exist. Refs should be able to have an interpretation as long as it’s consistent throughout the game. We expect consistency across all games ( me included) and it’s not possible. I remember when I played we’d say, “oh we’ve got Jones this weekend - don’t stand offside he’ll ping us all day” but the week after the next ref was a little different. But because we can all overanalyse every game, every week, we can compare across the round and say there’s tremendous inconsistency. I don’t know the answer but I would get rid of the bunker, go back to one ref and target refs with strong personalities- like Harrigan. He may not have always been right but he was always in charge out there.
“Peanuts! Get ya peanuts - in the shell or sugar coated!” Leichhardt memories.


User avatar
happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 39591
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Tue 12 Jun, 2018 8:56 am

Tiger Steve wrote:
Mon 11 Jun, 2018 10:12 pm
We are searching for perfection when it doesn’t exist. Refs should be able to have an interpretation as long as it’s consistent throughout the game. We expect consistency across all games ( me included) and it’s not possible. I remember when I played we’d say, “oh we’ve got Jones this weekend - don’t stand offside he’ll ping us all day” but the week after the next ref was a little different. But because we can all overanalyse every game, every week, we can compare across the round and say there’s tremendous inconsistency. I don’t know the answer but I would get rid of the bunker, go back to one ref and target refs with strong personalities- like Harrigan. He may not have always been right but he was always in charge out there.
But that's my point we can't play around with technology when it suits us , you either get rid of it altogether or use it to the tenth degree

I'm anal I know , I want things as right as they can possibly be and then when you aren't sure the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking team .....simple

Telltails
Member
Member
Posts: 2407
Joined: Fri 18 Apr, 2014 3:24 pm

Post by Telltails » Tue 12 Jun, 2018 9:29 am

I have been bagging the refs consistently for years now, and I have come to the conclusion that the only thing that will resolve my frustration is when we have a team that is good enough to win most games while absorbing the refs blunders and inconsistencies.
Winning makes poor refereeing tolerable.

User avatar
jirskyr
Member
Member
Posts: 5555
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:00 pm

Post by jirskyr » Tue 12 Jun, 2018 10:30 am

Harvey wrote:
Mon 11 Jun, 2018 6:32 pm
I don't think that the guys in the middle are totally at fault. The NRL continually stuff around with the rules and interpretations. They have got themselves into this position over many years of "managing" the game rather than refereeing it. At the basic level the rules are fairly simple.

Get rid of rules that allow various interpretations (you could do a doctorate thesis on the obstruction rule interpretation), have a set of rules and apply them in every instance. There will be mistakes, but these are easier to swallow if:
- there is a lot less grey area
- the referees are consistent in applying the rules
- they are willing to stick their hands up & own their decisions, including admitting a mistake rather than trying to introduce more grey are through trying to justify a garbage decision.
I agree with Tiger Steve, that this idea of removing interpretation is simply not possible. With 26 bodies all moving on-field at once, in 3D space, there will always be instances where an event has a split interpretation, i.e. half the people think one thing and half another.

An example is the Dylan Napa headbutt the other week. Refs called it out, post-match review said it was ok, Ch 9 commentators said it was an accident, lots of fans thought it was reckless. How can you remove interpretation from that incident? I mean he made contact with the head, so it's a clear penalty, but in terms of suspension and/or sin bin.

I believe there are two main issues with refereeing today.

Issue number one is that video technology and social media exist, so you can't avoid having the video ref (VR) and you can't avoid people talking about decisions in large numbers. In my youth, there were constant howlers from the refs, but everyone just had to cop them on the chin because there was limited technology to support the ref and you basically complained to your Dad, the kids at school / blokes at work, then moved on.

So anyone who says take out the VR or use less VR aren't being realistic. Everyone expects close calls to be reviewed, and refs who make live decisions without assistance take a big risk of making the wrong call. At least, if the VR looks at it, they might interpret it oddly but it's based on multiple camera views etc., i.e. it's fairly exhaustive. And considering how often on-field refs go to the VR, tells you how fast the game is and how often refs are making best-guess calls on what they've just observed.

The only solution to the VR is to remove it completely, which people just won't accept. And in some instances the VR is quite good, e.g. in-goal decisions or illegal play that was missed. I don't hear anyone complaining when the VR intercedes on an in-goal contest and over-rules the on-field ref.

In terms of social media, footy experiences part of the wider-society issue of narrowed positive confirmation, where if you go searching the internet for commentary on topics that concern you, you tend to find confirmatory information that reinforces your view. E.g. if you look up "refereeing mistake Tigers v Dragons" you aren't going to be directed to a reddit discussion where everyone was commending the referee performance. In contrast, even within this forum where we are all rabid Tigers fans and therefore of a fairly narrow mindset vs wider society, many opinions are split 50/50.

Second issue facing refs this year is the excessive refereeing. I believe they are just setting themselves up to fail. They should be blowing fewer penalties, not more. They should not be trying to "clean" anything up, it's just a mistake. All the fan, team, coach, commentator frustration this year is not about the volume of penalties, but because of the inconsistency it introduces by default. I think Joey said it on the weekend, if you look at any given ruck situation, of which there are hundreds per game, you could realistically blow technical penalties on most of them. If you only blow the occasional penalty for obvious instances, you remove most of the controversy about what you didn't blow penalties for. I.e. blowing very technical penalties regularly, you are just going to expose all the technicalities you missed. This is the prime issue with rugby union and the idiots at HQ have decided to go in that direction.

It also bring in the idea of "leveler" penalties, where fans believe refs equalise penalty counts to avoid scrutiny of a biased performance. It should actually be quite feasible that one team is better disciplined than another, but yes oddly enough penalty counts do tend to even out. So when you blow 25 penalties, a count of 20-5 is just going to look bad. But if you blow 6 penalties, there's less margin for discrepancy between worst and best behaved side.

Anyone who thinks the players are just going to start behaving are naive. They get tired and they push the rules constantly. If you rule severely, they won't learn, they'll just find ways to deal with the penalty counts. That's already evident this year, where rather than being afraid of penalties and sin-bins, many teams have figured out they can defend their line pretty well and actually the penalties provide short breathers.

Origin was ruled differently and the game was better for it. Nobody wants games decided by referees, that just sucks, it cruels the loser and robs the winner of proper satisfaction.

I appreciate CFK for the OP insight, thank you. I've always had some ambition to try and ref and give back, but my kids are little and I haven't the time. Maybe when they grow up later.

User avatar
TIGER
Member
Member
Posts: 3173
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 10:40 am

Post by TIGER » Wed 13 Jun, 2018 2:19 pm

And now they've just changed more rules, more sin bin rules.


User avatar
Chicken Faced Killa
Member
Member
Posts: 1487
Joined: Mon 17 Apr, 2017 8:19 pm

Post by Chicken Faced Killa » Wed 13 Jun, 2018 2:55 pm

TIGER wrote:
Wed 13 Jun, 2018 2:19 pm
And now they've just changed more rules, more sin bin rules.
They shouldn’t be changing rules mid season. It just shows they are reacting and aren’t carefully considering what they are doing.

User avatar
Chicken Faced Killa
Member
Member
Posts: 1487
Joined: Mon 17 Apr, 2017 8:19 pm

Post by Chicken Faced Killa » Wed 13 Jun, 2018 2:58 pm

I’m with Happy that we need to use the video ref more. Any opportunity they have to look at something they should. They have complete control of all the video and angles in the bunker and can quickly pull up what they need. Most scrums, penalties, and other stoppages have thirty seconds or so of players getting organised so plenty of time for them to have a look. If it’s 50/50 or unclear - go with the on field. If it’s a clear error change it. Having a mistake corrected in the moment is better than having to cope days of criticism and analysis due to a human error.

Go You Good Things
Member
Member
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed 13 Jul, 2016 3:54 pm

Post by Go You Good Things » Wed 13 Jun, 2018 4:32 pm

Chicken Face . . . . Very good points, and it's pleasing to see that some people hadn't considered the perspective of the ref . . . especially a junior ref.
HOWEVER . . . . you very politely glossed over just how feral many of the parents/supporters/coaches really are. :crazy
My son refs soccer, and you'd know what we go through. From what I'm told, the junior league fraternity is at another level of stupidity.
The way I shut the morons up is to say " mate, the ref MIGHT . . . stress MIGHT make half a dozen poor decisions. Your team is gonna make around 300 poor decisions during the game. Yell at them."
Since it became politically/socially correct to not scream insults at the kiddies ( which of course is the right outcome), the knuckle draggers need someone to vent their putrid spleens at . . . . so the ref cops it.
At NRL level, our WT bias demands that at least half of the penalties against us are just plain wrong . . . . our desperation at being WT fans accounts for another 25% being wrong . . . and by that stage, the whole bloody world is against us, and the ref is friggin blind !!!!!
It ends with " No ref, No game".
If the sideline idiots that abuse officials keep it up . . . the junior ranks of refs will disappear, then it follows that there won't be enough senior refs to officiate. Sow, and Reap.
So the next time you get the urge to hurl abuse at a 13yr old with a whistle . . . . just sit back and consider this kid could be YOUR kid . . . how would YOU take to some punter on the sideline abusing your kid ???. ( Not too well, I'd bet ! )
Sit back . . . remove your bias . . . and remember that your kid will probably make more poor decisions than the ref, and the ref is someone else's kid just looking to earn $20 enjoying his sport.

bathursttiger
Member
Member
Posts: 2410
Joined: Thu 02 Dec, 2010 5:21 pm

Post by bathursttiger » Wed 13 Jun, 2018 4:48 pm

Geo. wrote:
Mon 11 Jun, 2018 7:36 pm
Harvey wrote:
Mon 11 Jun, 2018 7:00 pm
They also need to publicly execute Tony Archer. Things have gone downhill terribly under his watch
They got rid of him replaced by Gerrard Sutton..
Isn't it Bernie Sutton?

Post Reply