Steve Walsh handed 6N finale again

First topic message reminder :

On form, the six nations will be a call between unbeaten France and Ireland. The "grand final" will be the last match played and similarly to last years climax between England and Wales, Steve Walsh has been handed the honours.

Surely this is yet a further underlining of the man's status as possibly the finest referee in the world and a continuation of the upward trend in his professional career after his well documented personal issues.

Congratulations Mr Walsh! A truly inspiring tale of personal strength and success - a role model for many no doubt!

Unfortunately when you have one wum doing it constantly others will fight back with the same sort of stuff.

rainbow-warrior wrote:

Biltong wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand.  Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

Come on mate, can we cease the "your country is worse than mine" please.

It is becoming tedious

But you tend to ignore GE with his disgusting comments, outstanding.

Oh and bepopper or what ever her name is.

sadly you are incorrect, I consistently reprimand GE.

What's your view on Walsh then Biltong. Has he ever wound up the SAs? I do think he tends to get annoyed with players and let that get in the way of his decisions sometimes but pretty decent for the majority of games.

I like Walsh as a referee, purely for his ability, I don't like him as a person though, I think he has an attitude, but as a referee I have no issues with him

GloriousEmpire wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand.  Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

Wow, that's a mighty flighty statement. I wonder if the mods will spot it.

Who else do you expect him to be surrounded by? Right in his comfort zone.

Biltong wrote:I like Walsh as a referee, purely for his ability, I don't like him as a person though, I think he has an attitude, but as a referee I have no issues with him

I agree he needs special player managent. He likes to be the authoritarian mate. That old contradiction. I guess super rugby players more used to his foibles find it is easier to get on his good side.

If only he could have got on the good side of NZ rugby chiefs eh? Why do you think they couldn't get the best out of him while Aus can?

He turned up drunk to a seminar/workshop or some such thing. That is a sackable offense.

Five pages on a ref whose game hasn't arrived yet. Another highly exciting year of rugby played in the 6N so far, I see   

Biltong wrote:I like Walsh as a referee, purely for his ability, I don't like him as a person though, I think he has an attitude, but as a referee I have no issues with him

I find that too often his attitude seems to have a negative influence his refereeing. He often seems to have attitude against one of the teams, meaning they get on the wrong end of plenty of decisions, they get more infuriated which increases Walsh's attitude against them and they can't turn it round from that point on.

jelly wrote:

Biltong wrote:I like Walsh as a referee, purely for his ability, I don't like him as a person though, I think he has an attitude, but as a referee I have no issues with him

I find that too often his attitude seems to have a negative influence his refereeing. He often seems to have attitude against one of the teams, meaning they get on the wrong end of plenty of decisions, they get more infuriated which increases Walsh's attitude against them and they can't turn it round from that point on.

Teams and coaches have the right and ability to look into areas of a game where they see massive inconsistencies in a reffing performance (the kind of performance you allude to in the case of Walsh potentially taking a dislike to a certain team)
Teams wouldn't just sit back and take that - they'd formally complain, they'd have their video analysis and if the powers had seen enough to suggest a ref was getting heavily "personally involved" (old favourite movie line) in the game, then they'd be forced to clip the ref's wings.

Teams aren't powerless in suggesting a Ref has showed bias.

True - but it just looks like sour grapes if you've just been well beaten on the scoreboard.

The RFU complained about him last year. That did look like sour grapes after they were utterly out classed by Wales.

Walsh is back this year, running the line for England v Wales and calling the finale.

Looks like the IRB back him fully.

The responsibility for not getting on a refs bad side lies with players just as much as the referees.

If a team is shouting and heckling and complaining for 80 minutes of course that will create a bad impression and influence his thinking.

Teams need to look at themselves first.

I assume you'll never mention Barnes again then GE?

Excellent stuff.

That should make for a better forum.

Fair point

Actually, I think it was proven Walsh is perfect and Barnes made a thousand mistakes, think that's the story.

ebop wrote:Actually, I think it was proven Walsh is perfect and Barnes made a thousand mistakes, think that's the story.

Ah, of course. How could I be so blind  

If want a thread in Barnes Cyril, then create one. Please don't try your usual tactics of derailing every thread please.

GloriousEmpire wrote:If want a thread in Barnes Cyril, then create one. Please don't try your usual tactics of derailing every thread please.

Que? You been on the pop again GE?

GloriousEmpire wrote:If want a thread in Barnes Cyril, then create one. Please don't try your usual tactics of derailing every thread please.

Oooh get you   

It's a thread about a referee. It's hardly off-topic to mention another referee and the accompanying double-standards.

PS I don't need to post a thread on Barnes. I could just dig up one of the dozen you've created  

It's a fair call though Cyril, if you guys think you've been shafted by a ref, then that's your right. Maybe you were but maybe that's just sport.

ebop wrote:He turned up drunk to a seminar/workshop or some such thing. That is a sackable offense.

But as GE pointed out, why couldn't NZ help and support him like Aus?

Dunno the details 7.5. I think they gave him a few chances. He lost it all, that's when he turned his life around, and good on him.

ebop wrote:It's a fair call though Cyril, if you guys think you've been shafted by a ref, then that's your right. Maybe you were but maybe that's just sport.

I agree, it's the ups and downs of sports.

We all have views on refs but, more than most sports, rugby is all about adapting and playing to the ref.

I may not have been a big fan of Walsh in last year's Wales/England game but I thought he did pretty well in our 2011 quarterfinal with France (another game England lost).

It doesn't reflect well on the NZ system though. Such a talented ref could have been left to rot if not for the Aussies.

Let it go 7.5 I'm not biting.

What are you on about GE? NZ failed Walsh but I'm just interested in why.

Yawn.

Walsh has got himself suspended at least twice and removed as a potential ref from certain games due to perceived bias.
Not a great record.
He's not always bad. He's often good - but when he is bad he's ferkin terrible.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Yawn.

At least you have an idea what we all feel like with 80% of your posts.

5 pages of posts about a referee confirms Walsh is a divisive figure. Can't recall seeing 5 pages about a referee before. The fact that some people defend him or at least don't see anything egregious in his decisions shows he clearly can be a good referee. However as a divisive referee, should he referee where his credibility is sometomes called into serous question?

You can't damn a man on suspicion. Until I see some solid evidence I'm forced to believe any opinion against him is mere reactive chagrin to a loss or two by disappointed fans reluctant to look inward for their failures.

GloriousEmpire wrote:You can't damn a man on suspicion. Until I see some solid evidence I'm forced to believe any opinion against him is mere reactive chagrin to a loss or two by disappointed fans reluctant to look inward for their failures.

We played so poorly and Wales so well England wouldn't have won with me reffing.

Please do not assume I don't like him because we lost.
I don't like him because I think he is a self centred twot with anger management issues.

GloriousEmpire wrote:You can't damn a man on suspicion. Until I see some solid evidence I'm forced to believe any opinion against him is mere reactive chagrin to a loss or two by disappointed fans reluctant to look inward for their failures.

And yet NZ rugby damned him. The shame it brings on all New Zealanders. A disappointing failure in NZs proud history.

 

Weren't you the one who threw a hissy fit when someone responded to you in smileys and threatened to glass them? I think it's disappointing that you correctly identified major failings in the NZ system but are happy to go along with them. Disappointing that for some reason the NZ officials are trying bring down a ref as good as Walsh. Shameful really.

I never threatened to glass anyone.

 

No 7&1/2 wrote:Weren't you the one who threw a hissy fit when someone responded to you in smileys and threatened to glass them? I think it's disappointing that you correctly identified major failings in the NZ system but are happy to go along with them. Disappointing that for some reason the NZ officials are trying bring down a ref as good as Walsh. Shameful really.

I think people got the wrong end of the stick with that whole glassing thing, I think I remember reading it as in he might be glassed, so it was sort of the opposite of what everyone read into it.

Walsh is a plonker, plenty of reasons to dislike him. But I do feel like he's improved hugely...since become a plastic Aussie.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:You can't damn a man on suspicion. Until I see some solid evidence I'm forced to believe any opinion against him is mere reactive chagrin to a loss or two by disappointed fans reluctant to look inward for their failures.

And yet NZ rugby damned him. The shame it brings on all New Zealanders. A disappointing failure in NZs proud history.

I dont feel any shame, we all know that when Walsh and Melodie split up, she was heavily involved in Rugby broadcasting , plus the number of alcohol fueled incidents, meant it was the ideal time for him to move over to Sydney, and time has proven that it was the best decision for all involved. She is now an excellant Rugby commentator and he has regained his position in World rugby Referees. in short everyone was a winner.

doctor_grey wrote:5 pages of posts about a referee confirms Walsh is a divisive figure.  Can't recall seeing 5 pages about a referee before.  The fact that some people defend him or at least don't see anything egregious in his decisions shows he clearly can be a good referee.  However as a divisive referee, should he referee where his credibility is sometomes called into serous question?

Then again Doc would you not admit that people preferring to have Roman Poite in the middle and Steve walsh on the Side line is absolutely insane?

aucklandlaurie wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:You can't damn a man on suspicion. Until I see some solid evidence I'm forced to believe any opinion against him is mere reactive chagrin to a loss or two by disappointed fans reluctant to look inward for their failures.

And yet NZ rugby damned him. The shame it brings on all New Zealanders. A disappointing failure in NZs proud history.

 I dont feel any shame, we all know that when Walsh and Melodie split up, she was heavily involved in Rugby broadcasting , plus the number of alcohol fueled incidents, meant it was the ideal time for him to move over to Sydney, and time has proven that it was the best decision for all involved. She is now an excellant Rugby commentator and he has regained his position in World rugby Referees. in short everyone was a winner.

Exactly, he was a plonker, but obviously had issues. I think the decent thing is to congratulate someone who dealt with his personal issues and became a better professional. OK, he had an odd relationship with England, but it's a good news story as far as I can see. Good on him, it's nice to see people come out of the other side.

goneagain wrote:

GloriousEmpire wrote:

rainbow-warrior wrote:

ebop wrote:You escaped from kindergarten again rainbow?

WHat the kindergarten called New Zealand.  Nah still here surrounded by simpletons.

Wow, that's a mighty flighty statement. I wonder if the mods will spot it.

Who else do you expect him to be surrounded by? Right in his comfort zone.

At least you agree hgahahahah

Anyone want to switch the debate to Alain Rolland?

Ruck was a total free for all again.

It will be an interesting read of the French papers over the next few days. My guess is the British press will say Rolland finished in style with a great performance. The French on the other hand....

But then again Notch,dont you appreciate how a thread like this is a revelation in that it brings out brings out the diverse criteria that different people use to arrive at their opinions of a referee, some people dont even take into consideration the quality of the rugby product, to them a referee's hair is a far more discerning quality.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
But then again Notch,dont you appreciate how a thread like this is a revelation in that it brings out brings out the diverse criteria that different people use to arrive at their opinions of a referee, some people dont even take into consideration the quality of the rugby product, to them a referee's hair is a far more discerning quality.

The majority here have told you that in their opinion Walsh is poor. Walsh is the only one worried about his hair. He is egocentric and plays for the camera. Sine the retirement of O'Brien NZ have had no world class refs.

Most posters actually said he was good rainbow, they said they disliked him personally. Which is odd, given that few if none actually know him.