RWC the crucial factor

With the coming of the RWC one area needs to be addressed the Officials,[Referees and line judges].
The Laws of the game are there in Black and White,but NH and SH officials use the laws differently.
In fairness and to avoid the controversy of 2007 in both ABs qtr,and the Final. The Refs Panel and
Should meet the Managers/Coaches/Captains concerned and decide a standard set of interpratations
whether it be,Scrum laws,breakdown,forward passes,offside whatever.All you can ask for in a match
is the Referees applies the Laws the same for both sides.
The RWC is supposed to be the pinnacle of the game and should be officiated as such.The best Refs
applying the Laws in the same way.Whether from NH,SH or the Planet Mars.

Agree.

GH has pointed out that the refereeing at the breakdown particularly is different between the NH and SH in that NH refs tend to allow play to go on longer whereas here the same scenarios get pinged.

This may have caused the increase in the amount of kicking that's going on, chip throughs etc

Surely the solution is to have the world's greatest referee, Steve Walsh referee all of the games?

Could we clone him? I'm sure he'd like that...

Yeah what they should have been doing is sending the elite refs to each the opposite hemispheres club comeptitions over the last couple of years.

Oh wait they have been havent they.

What they shoudl do is agree a standard set of rules and intepretations and stop tinkering with them for at least a year prior to the tournament.

Oh wait they did.

I gues sthey could try allowing the teams to meet with the refereess before games to discuss key points and raise refereeing issues of concern in both interprettation and the opposition play.

Which they already do.


Certainly their should be a central body that oversees the refereeing for the tournament and asseses peformances throughout.

Which there is.

Id like to see them have get togethers and workshops for the referees pre tournament to agree on certain standard practises.

Which they do.



Its just as well the players are allowed an ongoing dialogue with the referee throughout the game regarding how he is reading situations as well or the poor dears might get confussed.




Frankly if you think that refereeing style is likely to be the most crucial factor in decideing the world cup it does suggest your mind is on "getting the excuses in early". Id say the crucial factor is that New Zealand have by far the best team in teh comeptition. Only a truely incomeptant ref could stop them winning

"Only a truely incomeptant ref could stop them winning "

"OH WAIT. HE DID".

PSW

Nice set up And TGG doesn't disappoint.

Of course, truly incompetent tactics (and a bit of bad luck with injuries or a dodgy curry the night before the final) might compromise the ABs, but to be honest I think this time it really is theirs to lose.

Peter seabiscuit,this is nothing to do with getting excuses in first,IF you folow
NH and SH matches.you will have seen differences in interpratations.
SH refs in3N/S15 tend to let things that are marginal go knockons,etc in the name of keeping the game flowing.
NH refs are more dogmatic it needs that ONE standard be applied over all not
let one ref please himself how he Applies them.
i did`nt post this thread to dig up old controversies or get excuses in first.
but to hope for sensible debate !!

I wish they'd all learn to consistently penalise a crooked scrum feed.

Suspect they all let it go out of sheer relief that the thing hasn't collapsed, meaning they don't have to make the controversial decision about who to penalise.

Nothing irks me more than a scrum set because a lineout was crooked, which is then fed crooked and game plays on.

"SH refs in3N/S15 tend to let things that are marginal go knockons,etc in the name of keeping the game flowing."

That's ridiculous if the referee sees the knock on but doesn't give it. Play advantage sure, but don't let a "marginal" knock on go. If I had a dominant scrum and the other team knocked on, the referee let it go and they scored, I'd be highly upset.

I understand interpretations being slightly different with regards to tackler releasing the tackled player and tackled player releasing the ball, but a knock on couldn't be clearer.

emack2 wrote:Peter seabiscuit,this is nothing to do with getting excuses in first,IF you folow
NH and SH matches.you will have seen differences in interpratations.
SH refs in3N/S15 tend to let things that are marginal go knockons,etc in the name of keeping the game flowing.
NH refs are more dogmatic it needs that ONE standard be applied over all not
let one ref please himself how he Applies them.
i did`nt post this thread to dig up old controversies or get excuses in first.
but to hope for sensible debate !!

Yeah I understand that there are some difference in how domestic / hemishpere competitions are played and reffed. My point was that the authorities have done everything tehy can to ensure that the players and referees have had a chance to cross and understand how the world cup will be refereed.
They are all still individuals however with their own interpretations and ways of doing things, and that can even change within a game (see ECC final). Theres not a lot that can be doen about that, end of the day aomeone has to make a call.
Yeah its improtnat they are operating within a common understanding, my point is that most of the things you are asking for and more are already done. There will still be some element of knowing certain refs, and how they tend to think, that may or may not advantage certain nations when it comes to a cross hemisphere game. As an England fan I can really hold that as an excuse though, Im pretty sure we must have had more SH refs in charge of England games than NH ones in recent years ( bloody Kaplan!) ...maybe thats not true but its hardly uncommon.

The bit about excuses is just to refute your assertion that its the key factor, it may be one that infleunces the game but i would like to think theres more going on on the pitch than just that. The last bit was just for TGG, I swear he must have some kind of sixth sense for these things being posted.

TheGreyGhost wrote:I wish they'd all learn to consistently penalise a crooked scrum feed.

Suspect they all let it go out of sheer relief that the thing hasn't collapsed, meaning they don't have to make the controversial decision about who to penalise.

Nothing irks me more than a scrum set because a lineout was crooked, which is then fed crooked and game plays on.

Couldn't agree more. I really do believe that refs let so much go out of pure relief that a scrum has stayed up!

I don't so much have a problem with referees interpretations varying, or occasional mistakes being made. I think we have to be honest that if 5 different referees watched the same breakdown they would invariably penalise 5 different things. There's a lot going on, and quickly and referees can't be ideally placed to see everything that goes on at every single ruck.

All I want to see is a referee being consistent throughout an entire game - across all games he referees if possible, having a plausible foundation for refereeing as he does, and most importantly refereeing both sides the same way.

In the event where we see, for instance, an entire game go by where the referee continually "makes mistakes" at every single ruck and these "mistakes" seem to result in one side being consistently penalised whilst the other side is NEVER penalised, and those "interpretations" seeming to fluctuate by the minute, then I think it's safe to assume that no matter how good either team is, or whatever else is going on out on the pitch, that the referee is going to be the MAJOR factor in determining the outcome.

Without mentioning names.

Or specific instances.

Or games.

Or specific tournaments.

For example.

Let's just hope 2011 is decided by decisive rugby and not indecisive unjustifiable refereeing.

Sad that we have to "hope" for this, and not say "expect" it.

Exceptionally tactfully put Grey!