Steve Walsh dumped by IRB

First topic message reminder :

No surprise here then!

Independent -

Steve Walsh, the controversial Australian official who frustrated England to within an inch of their lives during the Six Nations finale in Wales 11 days ago, is the heaviest faller in the latest round of refereeing appointments sanctioned by the International Rugby Board.

Walsh will not control any of the 30 Tests scheduled for early summer, although he has been awarded the opening British and Irish Lions tour match with the Barbarians in Hong Kong on 1 June.

Haven't seen the interview (or all the other comments here) but get the gist. IMO they are right to seek clarification if they were getting pinged all the time so they could learn from it for future reference but should have done it in private. (Wales were by far the better team that day by the way)

However, all it would take is for one journo to ask GR or SL if they were disappointed in the way the decisions went against them. If they said yes they would be lying and if they said no then the journo would ask them what they intend to do about it. I'm not sure how they could answer without mentioning they would seek clarification with the IRB about some of Walsh's decisions (unless they just said there are proper channels which they are following which sounds suspicious)

Obviously England complaining/seeking clarification isn't the reason why Walsh has been demoted.

On a side note after the first Lions test in Durban everyone (all 4N fans, coaches and players) were complaining about how the Beast's scrumaging was illegal and that the ref was at fault for not picking it up - we were all friends together then

Nice post Dave

There is absolutely no way that the public nature of England's clarification/complaint had any impact on the IRB's decision. If anything, they would be more likely to support their man that give in to any individual nation having a complaint. Scott Johnson had a go at Joubert after the Wales - Scotland game but he has still been chosen to officiate. Gatland has had a go at refs in the past, so have many others and there is nothing to suggest it has influenced the IRB.

The simple truth is that Walsh hasn't been picked for an international match for a short period of time, no big deal (as others have pointed out a number of other refs have only got 1 game in this time and Walsh has got the Lions v Barbarians game). It may be down to his recent performances at both international and club level, it may be nothing at all.

Yes Jimpy, I do cringe when Gatland comes out and does something stupid, but as has been explained by Biltong there was already a system in place for such grievances as "clarification" of referees decisions after the game, so why did we have to endure all the gutter press about it as well ?

LordDowlais wrote:Yes Jimpy, I do cringe when Gatland comes out and does something stupid, but as has been explained by Biltong there was already a system in place for such grievances as "clarification" of referees decisions after the game, so why did we have to endure all the gutter press about it as well ?

the system in place is not for grievances to be clarified, it is merely a report card submitted by the coaches

LordDowlais wrote:Yes Jimpy, I do cringe when Gatland comes out and does something stupid, but as has been explained by Biltong there was already a system in place for such grievances as "clarification" of referees decisions after the game, so why did we have to endure all the gutter press about it as well ?

The press can write what they like. Whether it is actually newsworthy or not is another matter all together. To suggest that this sort of thing brings the game into disrepute is laughable when you consider the gaffs of other coaches that have gone before. What Billtong said is absolutely true, you and your ilk are in a tizzy because you perceive this as a challenge to the result of the match in question, not because you would be seen to be fighting the cause of righteousness and justice.

People are mistaking the press' actions for those of the RFU.

Sadly, the RFU don't have control over what the press can and can't say.

A majority of the articles regarding this issue (especially from the Telegraph) were vitriolic ones about England being sore losers for complaining, and were written by foreign journalists. Nothing to do with England.

It started with a fair double tackle from Lancaster & Rowntree within the laws of the game, but some of the partisan crowd got a bit ruffled. Some drunken journos shouted 'came in from the side ref' and 'what you gonna do about it' to further wind up the fans. Following the predictable riot, the IRB pulled their man off the pitch while a few of drunken journos and half the crowd set about duffing up Lancs and Dog ears. The ref has since gone on extended garden leave while 'Bomber' Lancs flies to Argentina for a spot of well earned rest & recuperation. Dog Ears is believed to have been fed to the Lions.

Jimpy, you really are quite antagonising aren't you, but I will not rise to your baiting, I could not care less about the result being challenged, it will still be the same result ten years from now, what I do not like is the fact that all the media are blathering about this in a negative way, which could all have been avoided if things were done differently.

LordDowlais wrote:Jimpy, you really are quite antagonising aren't you, but I will not rise to your baiting, I could not care less about the result being challenged, it will still be the same result ten years from now, what I do not like is the fact that all the media are blathering about this in a negative way, which could all have been avoided if things were done differently.

Don't worry Lord Leveson will be sorting out the media.

LordDowlais wrote:Jimpy, you really are quite antagonising aren't you, but I will not rise to your baiting, I could not care less about the result being challenged, it will still be the same result ten years from now, what I do not like is the fact that all the media are blathering about this in a negative way, which could all have been avoided if things were done differently.

What you actually mean is that I have a perfectly valid and opposing opinion to the one you're trying to defend with what appears to be faux outrage.

Jimpy wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Jimpy, you really are quite antagonising aren't you, but I will not rise to your baiting, I could not care less about the result being challenged, it will still be the same result ten years from now, what I do not like is the fact that all the media are blathering about this in a negative way, which could all have been avoided if things were done differently.

What you actually mean is that I have a perfectly valid and opposing opinion to the one you're trying to defend with what appears to be faux outrage.

Who or what am I trying to defend ?

So you are glad the media are spewing all this rubbish about it all are you ?

off to the Bickering thread lads.

ok

"**********Can the mods please consider this, why are you getting personal Jimpy? if you can't debate my point with valid facts and have to resort to childish your a homo humor, maybe you should walk and leave the grown ups talk . so mods please act on this i have just finished a weeks ban for the same type of thing! same rules for all**************************"

Oh dear. View runs to the authorities in public when his opinions are challenged. I think Lancaster and Rowntree can rest easy now.

I find this very depressing, Walsh isn't my favourite guy in the world, or even the best ref, but to be dumped off the back of a performance like that? I thought his performance was barely below par, and in line, if not better than a huge amount of reffing performances at international standard of late!

I hope this decision was based on his past, conduct and general concensus instead of a knee jerk reaction to a lot of questioning from a high profile governing body!!!

Based on all his recent past.... plus.
I just don't buy it that the IRB would knee jerk to Lancaster, I would expect the opposite in fact.
But I'd still be interested in seeing the 'clarification' response if it ever gets published.

gregortree wrote:Based on all his recent past.... plus.
I just don't buy it that the IRB would knee jerk to Lancaster, I would expect the opposite in fact.
But I'd still be interested in seeing the 'clarification' response if it ever gets published.

Thats all we could hope for in reality, he wasn't a saint, and he had a history, but the kind of things Ive been reading in the media regarding pressures on the IRB and Walsh didn't sound too good to me.

IMHO Walsh's performance in the game 2 weeks ago were probably average for international refs over the last few seasons!

Can't be arsed to read the thread but isn't this just a Tabloid headline from an increasingly desperate newspaper (The Independent)

Norfolklass, you're spot on. It's looking very much like a mischievous headline and that's being kind to the Independent. Don't believe everything you read in the papers, guys. Steve Walsh, like 13 other refs, has 2 appointments on the IRB list for summer 2013. Another 8 refs have one match each. Walsh also has 2 Super XV matches over the next 2 weekends. If that's him being dumped, it's a very odd way to do it.

When Chris Pollock and Craig Joubert walk out with the whistle, Rowntree may wish he'd held his tongue!

It hardly comes as a surprise that Walsh does not feature in the Lions series proper, given that he is representing the ARU. More telling that he has the only other available Lions clash.. no story to see, move on.

this should get the english tub thumpers going again!

Interesting performance tonight by Steve Walsh, not only using TMO referrals but also requests to go up on the big screen.

Interesting conversation between Walsh and Andrew Hore (late first half), which culminated in walsh saying to Hore "if you speak to me again like that then youre off"

I thought Steve Walsh had a first class game tonight. He utilised every resource he had to make the right call. The tackle on Weepu by N'onu was excellent reffing and after initially warning N'onu he saw the footage on the big screen and then yellow carded him. Had he not done so he would have been ridiculed.

Not only did he check the first Weepu try, the video ref actually called down to him for Weepu's 2nd try I think it was as he thought there could have been a knock on and a forward pass. Walsh accepted this and allowed it to be checked.

Yet again an excellent game by Walsh and proved beyond doubt that he is one of the top 3 refs in the world.

Yes some decisions slowed the game down because of the checking but far prefer that to wrong decisions.

There is a difference between 'capable of being' and 'is consistently'. I am happy he has done some good things and would be happier still at the thought of him never reffing England again.

Walsh is capable of very good reffing, he is also capable of very poor reffing. (The same could be said of Barnes and probably a few more too too).

The way Walsh reffed the Wales England game was good I thought on the whole. The scrum and the ongoing conversation with our hooker was plain odd.
However, if the scrum had been allowed to run Wales would have mullered it anyway in my opinion so it made little change to the game, save possibly winding up the England pack.

http://www.theweek.co.uk/rugby/52001/rugby-steve-walsh-six-nations-england-wales

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/rugbynation/rugby-news/2013/03/16/will-referee-steve-walsh-be-wales-six-nations-lucky-charm-91466-32997432/

Quite prophetic....

nobbled wrote:The way Walsh reffed the Wales England game was good I thought on the whole. The scrum and the ongoing conversation with our hooker was plain odd.
However, if the scrum had been allowed to run Wales would have mullered it anyway in my opinion so it made little change to the game, save possibly winding up the England pack.

offload wrote:

nobbled wrote:The way Walsh reffed the Wales England game was good I thought on the whole. The scrum and the ongoing conversation with our hooker was plain odd.
However, if the scrum had been allowed to run Wales would have mullered it anyway in my opinion so it made little change to the game, save possibly winding up the England pack.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:http://www.theweek.co.uk/rugby/52001/rugby-steve-walsh-six-nations-england-wales

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/rugbynation/rugby-news/2013/03/16/will-referee-steve-walsh-be-wales-six-nations-lucky-charm-91466-32997432/

Quite prophetic....

I think the most prophetic thing in those articles is the following statement:

"The scrum is an area where England believe they have an advantage, a belief strengthened with the withdrawal of Wales captain and flanker Ryan Jones through injury".

I'm surprised at this with England choosing such a light weight back row with little grunt in the 2nd row. Maybe they just misjudged something but I don't know why they thought they had an advantage in this area after the Italy game

Because they select on who "goes well in training..."

You're thinking of Howley Glas