Should a referee who makes too many poor decisions in a game be publicly sodomised? The sodomy could be by a ru prop.
Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk
Should a referee who makes too many poor decisions in a game be publicly sodomised? The sodomy could be by a ru prop.
Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk
He might be ok but could be like a competition prize for RU
Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk
*then everyone's a winner. Sorry for this absurd offensive postulation that i have posted.
Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk
Talking of refs bumped was talking to Ste Ganson yesterday he said Saints got everything on Thursday night!!!
Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk
Last two nights referees have been a complete disgrace, there seems no control any longer of referees at the RFL, how Job Sharp was ever put in control of them for a period is beyond belief. Coaches are to blame and nearly every club for the holding down and the third player flopping on top, but it is a lottery when it gets penalised, the game is becoming boring and slow.
I continue to be stunned by the disgraceful standard of superleague refereeing. These muppets are getting paid good money! I watch a fair bit of local amateur RL. The BARLA refs are generally better. Sure, there are an odd one or two who are hopeless. But there are a few who are head and shoulders above what the superleague has to put up with. Also, there has to be a reason, are they under pressure? Have they been instructed to look for 'this', and ignore 'that'? The same goes for the linesmen. They consistently fail to see what thousand of spectators see! There has to be a reason.
It's easy to slag of refs and anyone sensible knows it's not easy. That said at times you do have to think what the guy in the middle and his two assistants are actually looking at. Thursday's ref was poor. The problem he is the poster boy, being ex army with the familiar back story. Unfortunately being an ex soldier does not make you a good ref, especially as you have been fast tracked by those in charge to get some 'positive publicity' and forgetting he might be a little out of his depth.
I don't know what the solution is, but I do think players tactics which involve slowing the game down because refs don't punish it enough is driving fans away and more importantly the casual viewer. Guess it will have to get a lot worse until something might get done.
It would be interesting if we did what football do and add extra time on instead of stopping the clock,
I've said for a long time that refs have too much to do at the PTB - they've got to police the dicking about by the defence (who are coached in all the 'dark arts' of slowing the PT whilst also marking the 10m mark for the defensive line.
The result is that all too often they can do neither consistently well. There were a few instances on Thursday, for instance, where once the ref moved away from the tackle to set the 10m mark, the ball popped out - almost always the result of jiggery-pokery by the defence (hand in, bringing the knee up to knock the ball, etc). It was as if they were waiting for the ref to shift their focus away from the tackle/PTB before embarking on skulduggery. Both sides were guilty of it - just as all sides do similar in all games. Refs need eyes in the back of their heads.
Surely a much better arrangement would be for the touch judges to monitor the offside of the defensive line. If defensive players are in front of the line - and he'd be able to look right across the pitch - then raise their flag. The ref, meanwhile, could concentrate on the tackle and its aftermath right up to the actual playing of the ball.
Agree with the argument that refs have far too much to do around the PTB. If you stop and think about what they actually do it is ridiculous, and if an outsider watched the game they would honestly wonder why the refs are basically telling the players how to play the game.
Why do they tell defenders not to encroach the ten? Just mark the ten and then penalise them if they encroach.
Why do they tell players that they are not square at the PTB? Just penalise them if they aren't.
Why do they tell players if they are offside when they are chasing a kick? Just penalise them if they challenge for the ball or are within 10 yards.
Why do they tell players to get off the tackled man well into the game? Just enforce your tackle clock early then penalise players if they exceed it during the game.
The constant chit chat from the ref to the players makes it look like the players don't actually know how to play the game, and need the refs to talk them through it. It comes across as really amateurish, but as a sport we've just become used to it because that is how it is every game. Tell refs to let players play, and penalise them when they do not play it within the rules of the game. And let the refs actually referee the game. The referee should watch the game, and stop it when something happens that is not legal. He shouldn't manage the game, stopping players from breaking the rules by giving them advanced warning and changing the actual flow of the game by artificially changing how players behave because they've been told by the ref that something they are about to do is not legal. It's completely daft.
Imagine watching a football game and hearing the ref shouting out to a striker, 'don't make that run because you'll be offside'. It sounds stupid but that is basically the equivalent of what refs are doing in RL. It needs to stop, because IMO it makes the game look daft and makes the players look like children who need the ref to show them how to play the game they are paid to play.
"The great fallacy is that the game is first and last about winning. It is nothing of the kind. The game is about glory, it is about doing things in style and with a flourish, about going out and beating the other lot, not waiting for them to die of boredom." Danny Blanchflower.
Might have been written by a footballer about football - but never a truer word............
I don't share your problem with this. A difference between RL and football is that in RL there is potential for the whistle to be blown at pretty much any moment. Another difference is that a number of the most important areas of the game in terms of officiation, particularly around the play-the-ball, aren't exactly clear cut - they require a certain degree of interpretation by the ref. An important element of the referee's talk in RL is that he's letting the players know where he draws the line (this, incidentally, always seemed to be normal practice when I played amateur RU). If that leads to a reduced number of penalties, then that's fine with me.
Last edited by Dux; 12th September 2016 at 10:48. Reason: Grammar
As a referee of Union, tag and occasionally league I must tell you that you are talking nonsense. The whole essence is to encourage/warn/help the players stay within the rules or you would have a penalty on virtually every contact. It would be tedious, and dull for everybody.
Management of the game is vital and really difficult. The concentration and fitness is demanding in itself and getting the calls correct for 80minutes even if you see things is a task.
You have a huge amount of things to look at and ever referee will miss things as they move, turn and look at different aspects of the play.
Multiple tv camera coverage gives the viewer ever angle but the ref just has the one pair of eyes and can never be expected to see all those angles.
You need to accept the limitations of the individual and let technology help rather than using it to point out the mistakes.
And what of technology? It can be used to help the officials but changes the game somewhat. Look at the LBW's in cricket. What a spinner blows for has changed as a result of replays.
We could give teams a challenge as in tennis/cricket but you have to accept the game could be slowed down.
You also need to accept that the standards will be different in non televised matches.
The referees decision is final in the huge majority of matches. Both teams have to get on and understand its the same for both teams. Don't get pulled in the tv pundits need to have to encourage controversy or change our game so it ends up with the petulance you see from footballers.
Its v easy from the sofa. I criticise and have opinions that differ from the referees all the time. But put something back into the game rather than be negative. Your local referees society will, I guess, be delighted with your contribution as a referee, an assessor or an administrator.
Except that the Walsh none knock on was so obvious that it leads to a feeling that some referees have an agenda. Within 5 seconds a replay on the screen cleared up the argument, but the ref was not interested. On some occasions they are quick enough to waste a couple of minutes when a try is scored to prove there has been no knock ok.
I can't believe that people actually think that referees go into games with an agenda. What would Jack Smith have to gain from excessively favouring Cas? And in any case, the fact that he was getting abuse from both sets of fans on Thursday should tell you everything you need to know.