Jump to content

Big Red Keev

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

37 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

992 profile views
  1. I would like to think our Pack will have a point to prove after lasts weeks showing, and I would also hope we were not quite as rudderless with Brown back in the side. I seem to remember going into this fixture last year on the back of a poor show, with Cats having just mauled somebody or other and putting on our best performance of the season. Would settle for a win of any kind this time round, hopefully we turn up and they don't. Salford by 2.
  2. I understood that point the first time he made it in the previous post mate, hence why I didn't take offence. I simply said it felt a little personal when he felt he needed to make it again because I somehow missed it the first time, that's why I posed it as a question to ask if that was the case. He has replied and advised that it isn't the case and that's fine. You seem to be implying that I'm talking about hounding referees out of the game. I AM NOT. Any criticism made in the media or otherwise should never be personal or threatening. Everyone makes mistakes in all walks of life, I don't expect anyone to be infallible, I simply think its fair to be able to publicly point out mistakes, even perceived mistakes when those errors have an impact on results, and it should be possible to do so without fear of sanction. I understand that players and coaches make mistakes also, which obviously impacts performance and ultimately results. It just seems disingenuous to me to suggest that a poor refereeing performance (They do happen) cant have a huge impact on results also. This being the case I don't see the harm in stating it in an interview. Its obvious that sometimes Coaches and Players will be unfair, petulant and down right wrong. In which case that will reflect badly on them. Sometimes however criticism will be justified and for me it should be possible to make this public which it seems at the moment you are unable to do. The fact that referees apparently don't have the right to respond is a separate issue but an important one that I also believe should be addressed. For me in order for the situation to be fair we either eradicate public criticism of everyone within the sport completely (Which isn't really reasonable to expect), or everyone is subject to it. Feel free to continue to disagree with me however, that's fair enough.
  3. Obviously our definitions are different which is fine, nothing wrong with a difference of opinion, that's kind of the entire point of forums of this kind. I'm not really talking about the example of Ian Watson, its more the principal of the matter I'm talking about. You are correct he didn't "castigate" his own players for errors that were made. The point I am making is he is free to if he wishes. As is anyone else, I just don't know why referees need to be protected from the same level of scrutiny. I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve by pointing out grammatical errors I've made. I understood it the first time as you were making a point about drawing attention to mistakes. Now it feels a little personal when I just thought we were having a difference opinion about the game we both enjoy? If that's the way you want it though fine. "BTW" you are using ampersand incorrectly. For what its worth I made a couple of spelling errors as well, I will be honest that wasn't really the focus of my attention in all honesty, I'm supposed to be working. Without wanting to seem like I just want to get the last word in lets just leave it here. I genuinely was just debating something with you, I wasn't interested in aggravating you to the point that you would get so shirty, or turning this into some unwinnable semantic argument over the internet. So apologies if my opinion irritates you so much.
  4. In fairness i have always had issues with my there's etc. I really don't consider it bullying you pointing it out. Its a mistake on my part. I certainly wont cry myself to sleep over it. As to your rather sniping remark about me not reading the full topic, I've read and the entire thread and understood fully. Please point out to me where I said that referees shouldn't be treated with respect? All I've said, repeatedly, is when they do make mistakes people within the game should be able to point it out publicly, and I don't understand why that is a problem. We have a situation at the moment where if you mention a referees performance or question an individual decision publicly you are fined and that to me seems ridiculous. Your main argument against this has been that players and coaches make more errors, and hypothetically they wouldn't like it if the refs did to them. Personally I don't see this as a problem, the media do this at the moment and nobody bats an eye. Coaches and players learn to live with it, as should referees's. If you can explain to me how coaches currently have power or authority over referees that would be great as this doesn't seem to be the case at all? Also as someone who has administrated disciplinary proceedings involving bullying in the workplace I am fully familiar with the definition and how these policies should be applied. Just to reiterate, AGAIN, I'm not advocating name calling or the threatening of referee's in case that wasn't clear the number of times I have already said it. Saying you believe somebody got something wrong, publicly doesn't constitute bullying. Which is all I'm saying coaches and players should be able to do without fear of sanction. You can continue to tell me how wrong I am if you like, but it seems a little redundant.
  5. "Bullies" since when is criticism bullying? When is publicly disagreeing with someone bullying? You are conflating 2 things that aren't connected. Questioning somebody's ability to do something well is not a personal attack. Everybody makes mistakes that is not in question, my argument is this group are apparently immune from public criticism, when everybody else connected to the game is not. I don't care if a player makes 100 errors a game and a referee makes 1 its is utterly wrong that they cannot be public criticized for there 1 mistake or error. If they are so weak as to not be able to face public scrutiny, then they are not fit to take charge of anything never mind professional athletes. Nothing anyone can say will convince me otherwise.
  6. How do we know it wouldn't be given? Do we know if they ask? What do you mean by uproar anyway, what you are describing is basically what the media, fans, coaches and chairmen do now I dont believe that a referee pointing it out would be that much different. Especially if it meant that they were no longer beyond reproach. You are making a distinction that doesnt exist.
  7. So they could then if they chose to and sought written permission?
  8. how many examples would you like. The chairman of Hull KR recently publicly criticized his counter part at Catalan. Brian McDermott at Toronto criticizes the governing body fairly regularly. He was also critical of Marwan Koukash when he was involved at Salford. The Hull FC chairmen criticized his counterpart at Toronto publicly also recently. In terms of coaches criticizing players, well as has been mentioned they tend to leave there own players alone, which is a fair point but not always the case. Opposing players however, off the top of my head without quoting endless examples coaches who i remember publicly criticizing opposition players specifically. Watson, Powell, McDermott, McNamara, Smith and Radford. It happens all the time, and personally as long as it doesnt become personal I am fine with it, and I dont see why one group in particular should be immune from it.
  9. Yes I do think it perfectly "OK" to criticize officials, because everyone in every walk of life should be in a position where they can be criticized about there performance, whether that be one individual mistake or a general overriding ineptitude. No one individual or group should ever be immune from it regardless of circumstance. This forum exists primarily to discuss and debate issues within the game. If criticism didn't exist there wouldnt be an awful lot to discuss would there. You say that it makes the game look bad, whereas i would suggest that this is the reality of the world we live in. I like most sports with the odd exception, some of which I dont know an awful lot about as I have only a passing interest. I personally wouldnt be put off by the idea that one person within one of these sports didnt think another person within that sport was very good and said so publicly. I dont personally know many that would to be honest mate.
  10. Chairmen, Coaches and players do criticize there peers openly and in the media fairly regularly. They also criticize the governing body. The only people who are apparently off limits are the referees and touch judges.
  11. Thanks mate, i'm glad you understood my point. I'm not suggesting that we should be able to burn effigy's of referees outside stadiums. I just dont see why its is wrong to criticize referees publicly if they make a a poor decision or have a bad game, even if that is subjective. Would they ban coaches from praising referees publicly? If not then they should be able to say what they like as long as it doesnt become personal.
  12. Opposition players? then fairly regularly. Referees have opportunity to speak to the media, they choose not too. In fairness to them, why would they rock the boat they know next week they will be officiating regardless of performance. I never said coaches or anyone for that matter should have free reign to say whatever they like, I said if the criticism is justified there shouldnt be anything preventing them from saying it publicly. If you consider that unreasonable thats up to you.
  13. "How does it help them interpret things, that they thought at the time were correct, differently?" If it is pointed out where they have made a mistake or misintepreted the rules then surely this will help them to improve an area of there performance and hopefully make fewer mistakes this is exactly what a referees assessor does. With regards to being "Obsessesd" with match officials im pretty sure this is the first time i have ever commented on a referee performance on this forum ever. All I said was they shouldnt be immune from public criticism. Surely that is reasonable?
  14. To be honest mate, I'm not sure i totally agree. Its fair to say that holding referees accountable in isolation wont necessarily improve performance on its own. However negative reinforcement is one of the most widely used tools for improving performance. As i have said elsewhere I'm not advocating open season on referees as a tool to detract from a losing teams failings. But I fundamentally disagree with the notion that they cant be publicly criticized when all others in the game dont enjoy the same privilege.
  15. In fairness mate using Ian Watson as an example, in his interview the other day he stated that both he and Ian Blease have attempted to contact Ganson to raise a grievance and have yet to receive any response. If this is the case and I have no reason to believe he is lying what recourse do they have? Going back to my original post though, the RFL are subject to public criticism nobody complains. Chairmen, Coaches and players are all subject to the same scrutiny, why then are referees off limits. I accept its not an easy job and we couldnt have a game without them but the same applies to those stated above so why are they special. Im not suggesting some kind of specific campaign to publicly denigrate all referees publicly, but they cant be sacrosanct. I wont go in to what i do specifically, but as part of my job I am subject to possible public and widespread criticism. Nobody likes it but if its justified I have to suck it up.
  • Create New...