Joubert explains why he ran off the pitch

http://www.planetrugby.com/news/joubert-explains-why-he-ran-off-the-pitch/

I might have known it would be England's fault

could have shortened his excuse as in "I'm a coward".

fa0019 wrote:could have shortened his excuse as in "I'm a coward".

I wouldn't say any top-level referees are cowards. He could have handled it better, but the criticism of him by fans, media and ex-players was disgraceful. Scott Hastings in particular came across very, very badly.

Cyril wrote:

fa0019 wrote:could have shortened his excuse as in "I'm a coward".

I wouldn't say any top-level referees are cowards. He could have handled it better, but the criticism of him by fans, media and ex-players was disgraceful. Scott Hastings in particular came across very, very badly.

He was a coward. He didn't even shake hands and made no attempt to do it afterwards. talking about it 6 months later...

Right decision, wrong decision a referee should stand by them rather than hide in the broom cupboard/pick up his cheque from John O'Neill et al

fa0019 wrote:

Cyril wrote:

fa0019 wrote:could have shortened his excuse as in "I'm a coward".

I wouldn't say any top-level referees are cowards. He could have handled it better, but the criticism of him by fans, media and ex-players was disgraceful. Scott Hastings in particular came across very, very badly.

He was a coward. He didn't even shake hands and made no attempt to do it afterwards. talking about it 6 months later...

Right decision, wrong decision a referee should stand by them rather than hide in the broom cupboard/pick up his cheque from John O'Neill et al

Just as well it wasn't the wrong decision then. I did say he handled it badly. It doesn't make him a coward.

It's no wonder we struggle to create top-level referees though.

It was strange, know it was a decision at the end of the game but in real time I thought the same as him. It's only on the replays I saw. Can't call on the TMO on those situations though.

http://www.espn.co.uk/rugby/story/_/id/15208327/craig-joubert-admits-reconsider-world-cup-penalty

World rugby said it was the wrong decision.

Joubert says in hindsight he would "reconsider". Usually the best firm answer you'd get from a referee.

Sounds like the wrong decision to me.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It was strange, know it was a decision at the end of the game but in real time I thought the same as him. It's only on the replays I saw. Can't call on the TMO on those situations though.

If I recall, even his interpretation of his final ruling was wrong.

Sour grapes... I don't think you can totally ignore that in total honesty but it was wrong. Referees make wrong decisions all the time. Rugby is not a black and white sport. The way he acted sort of put the knife in though a public apology/explanation 6 months after is a bit pathetic. Says he spoke to Scotland thereafter not sure when but for me it highlighted why he isn't quite right at the top level.

Being a good referee isn't about being able to make a fair assessment of a situation/game. Its about managing games etc. We saw his managing of the 2011 final, about this QF. He bottled it both times. The English ref in 2007 made a mistake sure but he's been quite impressive since; big games decent temperament. I imagine the difference between top referees is how they manage these situations. Owens is the king because he gives teams a bit of understanding, takes a calm approach etc.

C'est la vie

It's the usual dissecting of refereeing decisions over multiple replays and hindsight that plague the game now. It was the correct decision based on what he saw (and without using the TMO). I certainly wouldn't blame him for that.

Running off looked bad, but given the reactions after the game Joubert possibly made the correct decision to diffuse the situation. Hastings etc indicated that they wanted to spark him out so he probably wasn't going to do a lap of honour

Cyril wrote:It's the usual dissecting of refereeing decisions over multiple replays and hindsight that plague the game now. It was the correct decision based on what he saw (and without using the TMO). I certainly wouldn't blame him for that.

Running off looked bad, but given the reactions after the game Joubert possibly made the correct decision to diffuse the situation. Hastings etc indicated that they wanted to spark him out so he probably wasn't going to do a lap of honour

What probably riled most was him running off not the decision. A handshake and calm manner would have quashed that. It was literally textbook on what not to do. I wouldn't be surprised if in future they use that in referee school as how not to manage a high pressured situation.

fa0019 wrote:Owens is the king because he gives teams a bit of understanding, takes a calm approach etc.

I actually think Owens' refereeing standard has dropped markedly in the last couple of seasons. He's made a lot of high-level errors. His game management seems to revolve around his 'banter' with players and him strutting around like Brian Glover in Kes. He "lets the game flow" (or ignores most infringements and doesn't understand the scrum, basically not refereeing).

He was up there with the best a while back, but not any longer. He's become a parody of himself and a bit of a 'celeb' and limelight hound.

Cyril wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Owens is the king because he gives teams a bit of understanding, takes a calm approach etc.

I actually think Owens' refereeing standard has dropped markedly in the last couple of seasons. He's made a lot of high-level errors. His game management seems to revolve around his 'banter' with players and him strutting around like Brian Glover in Kes. He "lets the game flow" (or ignores most infringements and doesn't understand the scrum, basically not refereeing).

He was up there with the best a while back, but not anyway. He's become a parody of himself and a bit of a 'celeb' and limelight hound.

I think his strength is that he recognises the need for flow. Some refs are trigger happy, 1 second holding on... ping! Same with that kiwi ref who used to be a decent player himself. Many times you know other refs would have acted like parking attendants... "just doing my job guv".

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It was strange, know it was a decision at the end of the game but in real time I thought the same as him. It's only on the replays I saw. Can't call on the TMO on those situations though.

If I recall, even his interpretation of his final ruling was wrong.

Sour grapes... I don't think you can totally ignore that in total honesty but it was wrong. Referees make wrong decisions all the time. Rugby is not a black and white sport. The way he acted sort of put the knife in though a public apology/explanation 6 months after is a bit pathetic. Says he spoke to Scotland thereafter not sure when but for me it highlighted why he isn't quite right at the top level.

Being a good referee isn't about being able to make a fair assessment of a situation/game. Its about managing games etc. We saw his managing of the 2011 final, about this QF. He bottled it both times. The English ref in 2007 made a mistake sure but he's been quite impressive since; big games decent temperament. I imagine the difference between top referees is how they manage these situations. Owens is the king because he gives teams a bit of understanding, takes a calm approach etc.

C'est la vie

It was wrong. Really hard decision though that wasn't obvious at the time. Understandable mistake and that's why I don't get why he ran off.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It was strange, know it was a decision at the end of the game but in real time I thought the same as him. It's only on the replays I saw. Can't call on the TMO on those situations though.

If I recall, even his interpretation of his final ruling was wrong.

Sour grapes... I don't think you can totally ignore that in total honesty but it was wrong. Referees make wrong decisions all the time. Rugby is not a black and white sport. The way he acted sort of put the knife in though a public apology/explanation 6 months after is a bit pathetic. Says he spoke to Scotland thereafter not sure when but for me it highlighted why he isn't quite right at the top level.

Being a good referee isn't about being able to make a fair assessment of a situation/game. Its about managing games etc. We saw his managing of the 2011 final, about this QF. He bottled it both times. The English ref in 2007 made a mistake sure but he's been quite impressive since; big games decent temperament. I imagine the difference between top referees is how they manage these situations. Owens is the king because he gives teams a bit of understanding, takes a calm approach etc.

C'est la vie

It was wrong. Really hard decision though that wasn't obvious at the time. Understandable mistake and that's why I don't get why he ran off.

didn't eat his jungle oats that's why.

SA equivalent of ready brek

fa0019 wrote:

Cyril wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Owens is the king because he gives teams a bit of understanding, takes a calm approach etc.

I actually think Owens' refereeing standard has dropped markedly in the last couple of seasons. He's made a lot of high-level errors. His game management seems to revolve around his 'banter' with players and him strutting around like Brian Glover in Kes. He "lets the game flow" (or ignores most infringements and doesn't understand the scrum, basically not refereeing).

He was up there with the best a while back, but not anyway. He's become a parody of himself and a bit of a 'celeb' and limelight hound.

I think his strength is that he recognises the need for flow. Some refs are trigger happy, 1 second holding on... ping! Same with that kiwi ref who used to be a decent player himself. Many times you know other refs would have acted like parking attendants... "just doing my job guv".

I think the best ref is somewhere in between. 'Letting the game flow' quite often equates to allowing sides to illegally slow the ball down, meaning no-one gets quick ball. You might not have as much whistling or stoppages but it doesn't necessarily make for a good game.

One thing that Nige does that annoys me is the whole, 'Release!', 'Hands off, Seven!', 'Leave it!, 'No Hands! Ruck Called!', 'Ok, turnover good!'.

Cyril wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

Cyril wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Owens is the king because he gives teams a bit of understanding, takes a calm approach etc.

I actually think Owens' refereeing standard has dropped markedly in the last couple of seasons. He's made a lot of high-level errors. His game management seems to revolve around his 'banter' with players and him strutting around like Brian Glover in Kes. He "lets the game flow" (or ignores most infringements and doesn't understand the scrum, basically not refereeing).

He was up there with the best a while back, but not anyway. He's become a parody of himself and a bit of a 'celeb' and limelight hound.

I think his strength is that he recognises the need for flow. Some refs are trigger happy, 1 second holding on... ping! Same with that kiwi ref who used to be a decent player himself. Many times you know other refs would have acted like parking attendants... "just doing my job guv".

I think the best ref is somewhere in between. 'Letting the game flow' quite often equates to allowing sides to illegally slow the ball down, meaning no-one gets quick ball. You might not have as much whistling or stoppages but it doesn't necessarily make for a good game.

One thing that Nige does that annoys me is the whole, 'Release!', 'Hands off, Seven!', 'Leave it!, 'No Hands! Ruck Called!', 'Ok, turnover good!'.

He loves telling people they are amazing doesn't he. "Sergio, I have a lot of respect for you blah blah blah....."

On another note, everytime I see Sergio playing these days all he does is moan. Its the Argentine in him. He can't help it I guess.

fa0019 wrote:

Cyril wrote:

fa0019 wrote:

Cyril wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Owens is the king because he gives teams a bit of understanding, takes a calm approach etc.

I actually think Owens' refereeing standard has dropped markedly in the last couple of seasons. He's made a lot of high-level errors. His game management seems to revolve around his 'banter' with players and him strutting around like Brian Glover in Kes. He "lets the game flow" (or ignores most infringements and doesn't understand the scrum, basically not refereeing).

He was up there with the best a while back, but not anyway. He's become a parody of himself and a bit of a 'celeb' and limelight hound.

I think his strength is that he recognises the need for flow. Some refs are trigger happy, 1 second holding on... ping! Same with that kiwi ref who used to be a decent player himself. Many times you know other refs would have acted like parking attendants... "just doing my job guv".

I think the best ref is somewhere in between. 'Letting the game flow' quite often equates to allowing sides to illegally slow the ball down, meaning no-one gets quick ball. You might not have as much whistling or stoppages but it doesn't necessarily make for a good game.

One thing that Nige does that annoys me is the whole, 'Release!', 'Hands off, Seven!', 'Leave it!, 'No Hands! Ruck Called!', 'Ok, turnover good!'.

He loves telling people they are amazing doesn't he. "Sergio, I have a lot of respect for you blah blah blah....."

On another note, everytime I see Sergio playing these days all he does is moan. Its the Argentine in him. He can't help it I guess.

Parisse has become a serial whinger in his twilight years. There's a lot of complaining and trying to get opposition players carded. He's become greedy and trying to do it all himself. I think he's just growing sick of playing for Italy

started to read the press, the usual drivel... Italy are rubbish but Sergio would get into any side in the world yawnfest.

Good article. Joubert also seems to be a really nice guy. My thoughts on his referee skill still stand though. I'm not sure he is cut out for it.

Slightly off topic, but a question: when I was playing a few years back, at the beginning of the season the ref went through the breakdown with us. He was quite explicit that once the first player at the breakdown had their hands on the ball, it didn't matter if they subsequently went off their feet, as long as they kept their hands on the ball. Was this rule changed, because I don't see it being enforced anymore?

If they have got possession of the ball then fell it would be fine. If it was being contested and they went off their feet they need to release and stop competing.

The reason Scotland lost was not one poor decision by Joubert that could only be seen after multiple replays - it was because they messed up the restart and then the lineout.

That excuse is disgracefull...

'I ran from the pitch to avoid the Scottish coaches getting fined trying to find out what I did wrong, like those English coaches did. I wasn't scared, I am just that great an ambassader of the game I was pre empting a really difficult situation post game and thought for Scottish coaches sake i'd just dap it brub...'

Disgrace, and until he discusses the 2011 RWC final he'll always be a disgrace in my eyes!

Reading the comments under the article...

George Smith
'He is a cheating scumbag I hope he gets raped and dies in a car fire'

I hope thats a different George Smith hahahahaha

Cyril wrote:
Just as well it wasn't the wrong decision then. I did say he handled it badly. It doesn't make him a coward.

It's no wonder we struggle to create top-level referees though.

They are under too much pressure, and the game is about attrition now, so matches are very often tight, the current rules make them this way. Sadly close games are often decided by a referees interpretation as a result referees performances are picked apart and the losing team and their fans tear him apart. We all do it, maybe we need to try and tweak the rules to make it more about attacking. But then when we get basketball scores people moan either way. I had the thought of reducing the amount of players, or only allowing a team so many phases to use the ball, then I realised that game is called rugby league...
In a strange way though they had this problem at one point and clearly that is the solution that evolved, not to mention less players means less money needed to pay players, and more space on the field. We have a lot of problems at the scrum, maybe we could have passive scrums...