SANZAR have warned coaches that taking unnecessary pot-shots at referees could land them in hot water.
New Zealand referee Chris Pollock has been axed from the Super Rugby play-offs, because of poor form.
rugby365
The decision to drop the Kiwi down the pecking order comes in the wake of a growing chorus of outcries against the declining standards of refereeing.
Stormers coach Allister Coetzee, Blues coach John Kirwan and Waratahs mentor Michael Cheika all criticised referees at the weekend.
SANZAR Chief Executive Greg Peters, in an exclusive interview with this website, confirmed that they will not tolerate abusive behaviour towards match officials.
“We are looking at those at present and considering them,” when asked if there had been any complaints about all the coaches having a go at referees.
“Ultimately we don’t want to stifle debate on the game,” Peters told this website.
“There is no problem with a genuinely held belief that a decision [made by a referee] was wrong, [when] using temperate language.
“However, if it goes to questioning the integrity of the referee or is abusive or insulting [language] that is when it is of more concern to us.”
Coetzee, in his post-season assessment after the team’s 30-13 victory over he Bulls at Newlands at the weekend, pulled no punches – despite his team already having being fined once this season in a stand-off with officialdom.
Coetzee said he felt there were two matches in which questionable calls from match official cost his team – defeats which ultimately cost them a place in the Super Rugby play-offs.
The Stormers coach’s verbal barrage against match officials came on a weekend which also saw Kirwan and Cheika launch scathing attacks on referees.
An incensed Kirwan demanded referee Chris Pollock be held accountable for his ruling in a red-card controversy which he said ruined their Super Rugby match against the Chiefs at the weekend.
And Cheika has joined his colleagues in taking aim at the poor standard of refereeing in Super Rugby, suggesting they are turning the game into ‘touch rugby’ – with Steve Walsh the target of his scolding.
Earlier in the season former All Black coach Graham Henry, who is now a Blues assistant coach, was let off with a reprimand and an agreement to issue a public apology – having labelled fellow Kiwi Keith Brown a “blind TMO”.
The growing number of coaches crying out against referees and other match officials suggest the problem needs to be addressed urgently.
The axing of Pollock, New Zealand’s No.1 referee, will be seen as a step in the right direction.
But Peters warned coaches that there is a fine line between acceptable criticism and abusive behaviour.
13 @ JT:
My mistake sorry just assumed that as a Blue Bulls and Bulls supporter that folk would be WP and Stormers supporters.
29 @ Just For Kicks:
Later this afternoon… I am due to depart to SARS and thereafter to Nuffield to a client…
26 @ grootblousmile:
Good morning GBS, yes have mentioned before that the players are more dispensable than the refs, ie. there are far fewer referees around so can’t just keep on throwing them away after each bad performance – eventually will be too few left for games to take place. Also players make mistakes in games that cost their teams – maybe throwing a bad pass or knocking on with the tryline begging pretty basic stuff that pros shouldn’t do but in the pressured environment these things happen – and think players mostly only get dropped if they have played really badly through the game.
@ grootblousmile: Cool, jeu give me a shout when you’re back, Skype is on, thanks
23 @ JT:
Unfortunately for French national rugby it appears the Top 14 is more important to many than the national cause. I am all for the movement of players between countries but there has to be some balance between getting overseas pros in to help lift the level and giving locals the chance to play and develop. Whereas in South Africa there are not too many imports in our Currie Cup and Super teams, this gives local guys more chances but I think the odd high profile signing per team, maybe in an area where there is concern regarding depth, would not be such a bad thing plus this may lead on to raising the awarenes off the province/franchise in the country where the star comes from and potentially new extra revenue…
@ grootblousmile:
Why? It is a very unappreciative job these referees do for all of us – no ref = no game.
We really do not want to go down the path of soccer where there is NO respect towards the officials.
Try refereeing a game – it is tough, you personally know you did the best you could and only blow up incidents you see and then after the game you get lambasted from all sides – one of the reasons I rather coach than ref.
lack of referees is a huge problem especially in leagues like Austria – why would someone give up his Saturday to drive to a pitch hundreds of kilometers away from home, referee a game and get abused for it?!
Interesting thoughts from Gary Gold – taken from his blog on Supersport.com:
From a coach’s perspective, the breakdown is up there with the most vital areas that need coaching in the modern game. In our environment at Bath, we would spend as much as 25 percent of our time on the breakdown. If one were to consider that the game consists of 70-odd breakdowns, 15 lineouts and 8 scrums on attack and defence, it’s clear to see where one’s attention should be placed.
When examining the breakdown, the next factor to consider is the referee’s profile. While Romain Poite is a good international referee, had a team done their homework on him, they would have discovered that he’s fairly lenient at the ruck and tackle area.
For example, during the match there were blatant side-entries from both sides on attack and defence. Primarily, however, the Scotland players were slow in rolling away and when they counter-rucked, they failed to come through the gate legally.
There has certainly been a swing in referees’ interpretations. Around 2009, in particular, about 50 percent of penalties were awarded to the attacking team while the other half went to the defending team.
This is fundamentally why the Springbok game worked so well during those days. We played no rugby in our own half and any team that chose to play rugby in their own half, would be punished by our suffocating defence and accurate goal-kicking. This approach led us to a hat-trick of wins over the All Blacks that season.
At this point in time, however, the ratio is 75:25 in favour of the attacking team. The benefit of the doubt is clearly favouring the team with ball in hand.
The principles I discussed last week pertaining to the scrums apply to the breakdown. I share Heyneke Meyer’s call for a standardised approach to policing the breakdown.
At the moment, much like the scrum, the referee’s interpretation at the ruck and tackle area is far too subjective. For example, it’s now common practice for one referee to place an emphasis on the tackler rolling away, while another official will prioritise the first arriving player on attack. And a third referee may pinpoint the arriving defender, other than the tackler, coming through the gate legally.
The classic case is Bryce Lawrence’s officiating of the 2011 Rugby World Cup quarterfinal. From extensive prior analysis, we found that he awarded an average of 25 penalties per match and had a 65:35 ratio in favour of the attacking team. Furthermore, he awarded a higher percentage of penalties at the breakdown than any other international referee at the time.
However, during the now infamous clash between South Africa and Australia, he awarded the fewest penalties any referee ever had in a Rugby World Cup match since 1987. In total, he blew for 17 penalties: 11 against the Springboks and six against the Wallabies. In one match, his entire mechanics had changed.
Thus, as professional coaches, we are ultimately calling for a clearer outline from the game’s lawmakers in order to eliminate refereeing discrepancies.
Turning to this Saturday’s clash, the Samoans will offer a highly physical approach and thus the Boks will do well to increase their line speed and employ double hits in the tackle. The key is to catch the free-running Samoans on or before the advantage line in order to neutralise their ball carriers and the threat of offloads. Moreover, the Boks will look to dominate the set phases, as this facet of play is the Samoans’ primary weakness.
33 @ Bullscot:
Hello Bully,
Yip, whilst that may be so, I cannot believe that that is good enough reason to protect the refs so much… to the extent that they have become an arrogant bunch of shits who think that they are untouchable.
At the very least, referee performance measuring and monitoring must be a transparent process, well communicated all the way down to public level.
They should be facilitators of a game, not the main attraction of the game. The best refs seem to be just that, facilitators…. like Glen Jackson (hope he stays levelheaded).
34 @ Just For Kicks:
Will do!
@ Bullscot:
1. TV is the biggest culprit IMO to the interpretation issue – The Aussies love to harp on about it being entertainment and compete with other entertainment on TV. Tis IMO is total BS! It is a sport 1st! Treat it like a SPORT and not entertainment. Apply the laws as written and strictly and apply ALL the laws which include feeding the scrum properly!
2. informing players of where you as ref see the off-side line etc. is fine. Informing a player that he is doing something wrong and then letting it go – not fine!
3. agree
36 @ JT:
I can understand that we do not want to chase away the Casual Saturday or weekday ref…
But when you turn pro, make money from it and officiate in massive money-spinning games where Pro Franchises and Pro Player’s careers are at stake, where national honour might be at stake, you need to be accountable, and seen to be accountable!
@ grootblousmile:
how many mistakes do you let a player make before replacing him? Look at Zane for example – one of the best full-backs in SA but makes the odd mistake per game. Do you drop him for a nobody becuase of that? No – same with referees IMO. However they (ref) make very few mistakes when compared to players.
I also think referees cop a lot of flack due to the fact that there are so many gray areas in the rule book, in the Laws…
Simplifying breakdown point rules, scrum rules, lineout rules… that WILL make the game easier to officiate and give less chance for interpretave mistakes or bias.
@ grootblousmile:
perspective – players make more mistakes and yet turn out week after week for the team. Refs make a fraction of those mistakes and yet you want to replace them?
Referees do not drop balls, miss tackles or make intercept passes 😉
41 @ JT:
Every player IS under scrutiny, and remains so… and if his performance is not better than the next fullback or wing or whatever, he WILL be dropped. If not dropped, he might not be considered for higher honours… the whole time there is that motivation factor involved with a player… I have to improve, I have to aspire to better… otherwise the sword of Damocles hangs over me.
I simply do not see the same with the refs… mediocrity is safely swept under a carpet, nobody is allowed to voice a disgruntled opinion, hell they get diciplined if they do!
Against players there is no such prohibition, you may praise or criticise a player like you want…. but heck no, not a ref!
The measure is clearly skew!
The same considerations do not apply!
A coach is open to crit, but heck no, not a ref!
43 @ JT:
I do not say drop the refs, for no apparent reason… I say make the process more transparent!
I say make the rules simpler to officiate!
I say make the refs accountable and open them up for a bit of crit when they do have a bad day!
I say get away from this overbearing bag of silence that hangs around pro referees…
You might find if the process is more open that we suddenly have better refs and better communication all the way through!
@ grootblousmile:
breakdown is/should be officiated in a step by step basis – that is how I was taught anyway.
Step 1. after tackle the tackler needs to release tackled player.
Step 2. Tackled player needs to place/pass the ball immediately (of course tackler must not interfere here.
Step 3. Tackler can get to his feet and play the ball.
Step 4. arriving players (non tackler) must enter area from 90° angle and stay on their feet.
Step 5. When ruck is created – no hands unless hands already on the ball. Off-side line now accross the field for both sides.
only guy that can legally stay grounded is the Ball Carrier but he can not play the ball – all others need to get out/up.
Make a mental checklist and if you see step 2 or 3 being infringed – call advantage and see what developes. Simples on paper 😉
@ grootblousmile:
by whom – when a coach from the brumbies openly crits the coach from the Bulls there will be consequences.
Public can say what they like – coaches and players need to watch what they say about admins, other players and referees – IMO that is fine.
Referees do get disiplined, Stuart Dickenson was removed from the S14 for a season or two thanks to bad performances which was harsh IMO – it was more about pressure from SARU :-/
They also have to compete for higher honours – refereeing a 6N game or a TRC game or a RWC game is the ultimate for a ref. You under perform you don’t make it unless of course your family member is in the position to get you in for example that kiwi poephol 🙁
refereeing is a competative business at the top – make no mistake!
46 @ JT:
Problem is Step 1 to beyond Step 5 very often takes fractions of seconds…
Eishhhh… and don’t let me get started on how soft the powers that be are trying to make rugby…. hell it is a gladatorial sport, and needs a lot of that oomph, grunt, aggro… panache…
@ grootblousmile:
I find the process is open already – It is just the way you go about it is being looked at. A coach after the game should not crit the ref – make a case, show video of inconsistancy or poor judgement and send it to SANZAR. Make a proper argument.
Many times a hear coaches moan about this or that decision but if they feel THAT strongly about it they should take it further but they hardly ever do because they later (when emotion is low) realise that their case is not as strong as previously believed.
Joubert was terrible in the RWC final especially in the last 20min – he did not have the balls to penalize the kiwis on 7 different occasions which could have given France the RWC – I would make a case if I was the French coach but how strong would that case be compared to the media storm and crit he would get as bad loser!?
47 @ JT:
If it is so competative at the top… then there should be no reason not to have a more open and circumspect referee adjudication system….
Look, I’m not advocating that we throw the baby out with the bath water…
In LAW we often say: “Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done…”
To me, EXACTLY THAT is the measure here too…
@ grootblousmile:
Bulls v Sharks, SA vs Samoa etc. did not look soft to me 🙂
If anything it is getting tougher hence the powers that be are trying to prevent serious injury.
I often wonder how there are not more injuries in a game! The size, power and speed of these players are not compareable to the teams of the 80’s and before IMO.
It seems Chris Pollock, NZ Super Rugby referee who has now been stood down a bit… agrees with me!
Check here: http://www.supersport.com/rugby/super-rugby/news/130715/Revamp_rugby_lawbook_NZ_ref
@ grootblousmile:
The referees are judged all the time – referee assesors are at every game – yes these reports should be transparent.
Maybe someone at the NSA could forward these to us 😉
51 @ JT:
Come on… talk to any former front rower, hooker, lock… and they will tell you that a lot of the guile and opportunity has been taken out of the scrum engage.
Talk to any hooker and he’ll tell you that a good straight throw and therefore a chance at a deserved tighthead is almost non-existent at present.
Talk to anybody who played when CONTROLLED RUCKING was the rule, how quickly you moved away from the wrong side in a ground ball situation..
Once again, I’m not saying abandon all rule and make it unsafe… I’m saying do not get rid of the reasons we like the contest, do not get rid of the gladatorial nature of the game…. make it easier to officiate.
@ grootblousmile:
I was a hooker when all these things were applied – my fav part of the game was to ruck the bliksim out of a ruck!
I am all for bringing back the “slipper” rucking!
HOWEVER I am all for bringing back the type of scrum engagement from the 70’s – watch the Baabaas v NZ from 1973 – there was no HIT!
The scrum HIT has nothing to do with guile – that comes in the hook & push when the ball is fed straight! Apply the LAWS correctly IMO.
Fark, the newbie is keeping me out of my bread and butter work…
JT, we’ll have many more engaging talks here…. business calls.. and the tills have to keep rolling!
55 @ JT:
I was an opensider…. I got moerred and rucked many times… and did the same back.
@ grootblousmile:
@ JT:
Ek stem 100%. Plan moet gemaak word met die skrumreels, dis n tydmorsery, te tegnies ook, niemand weet wat flippin aangaan nie, kyk maar net bv Brock Harris teen Greyling verlede Saterdag…
Wat die refs betref, hulle het veral die Stormers gekos vanjaar, moerse klomp swak beslissings wat die WP drie wedstryde in beseringstyd laat verloor het.
58 @ Pietman:
Selfde storie met 2 van die Bulls se close nederlae oorsee die jaar… omstrede beslissings.
So is ek seker dat elke span dieselfde sal kan sê…
1 Outjie wat uitstaan as goeie skeidsregter die jaar is Glen Jackson… hy het self Super Rugby gespeel… hy is baie goed maar moenie grootkop kry nie.
@ grootblousmile:
Ja, Glen Jackson, het Saterdag vir my swaer dieselfde gese, hy is goed. En hy is geensins n prima donna wat oral wil in die spotlight wees soos party van die ander nie, hulle hou te lang vergaderings op die veld man, konsultasies, en wat nog….breek die ritme van die wedstryd.
En ek moet se, ek hou van Steve Walsh ook.
Users Online
Total 61 users including 0 member, 61 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 39,438,483 Page Impressions
_