Neutral Refs Please - It's Just Awkward

[Scubby]

me neither. People on here have strange friends i find that ask very specific questions about certain issues.

 

My wife asked me the same thing. It was the ref microphone that prompted her.

[DavidM]

I thought Thaler was excellent . Referees with the minimum of fuss . The Aussies like having their own ref , and that cost us big style last year . I bet Sutton is a lot more visible than Ben

[Pyjamarama]

I have never, EVER, had anyone as a casual watcher ask me in over fifty years of watching the game why we don't have neutral refs. Not once.

 

His point was that - if England football team were playing, eg Scotland, Germany , France or whoever, it would be almost unthinkable to have a non neutral ref, especially with how the respect for the ref is so poor in football. The dummy would probably be hurtled out of the pram by the players and media if (for example) in the next Euro championship an English ref awarded a contentious last minute penalty against Scotland.

 

For what it’s worth, I thought Thaler did ref the game well, but if he’d made a couple of bad decisions that cost the Kiwis the game, the fact that the ref wasn’t neutral would potentially be an issue.

[Steve Fox]

I thought NZ's two interceptions on the fifth tackle (the first one clearly a try-saver) both came from players who were yards offside when the ball was played. Be interesting to watch the video and see if that was indeed the case.

Both miles offside.

There was also an incident when England were attempting to get back to the 20 for a quick tap restart and a Kiwi knocked the ball from someone's grasp - I thought that was an automatic yellow card.

[DoubleD]

His point was that - if England football team were playing, eg Scotland, Germany , France or whoever, it would be almost unthinkable to have a non neutral ref, especially with how the respect for the ref is so poor in football. The dummy would probably be hurtled out of the pram by the players and media if (for example) in the next Euro championship an English ref awarded a contentious last minute penalty against Scotland.

 

For what it’s worth, I thought Thaler did ref the game well, but if he’d made a couple of bad decisions that cost the Kiwis the game, the fact that the ref wasn’t neutral would potentially be an issue.

 

Why should it be an issue? Refs can get a decision wrong whether they're French, English, Scottish, Australian, Norwegian or Bangladeshi. We shouldn't discriminate because of someone's nationality, refs are professional enough to do the job without being biased. We shouldn't pander to the blame society we have these days (which is often driven by the media to be fair)

[Maximus Decimus]

I have never, EVER, had anyone as a casual watcher ask me in over fifty years of watching the game why we don't have neutral refs. Not once.

I've never watched a game of international football where somebody has said the problem with the refereeing is that he doesn't come from one of the two competing countries.

[Maximus Decimus]

Why should it be an issue? Refs can get a decision wrong whether they're French, English, Scottish, Australian, Norwegian or Bangladeshi. We shouldn't discriminate because of someone's nationality, refs are professional enough to do the job without being biased. We shouldn't pander to the blame society we have these days (which is often driven by the media to be fair)

This type of thinking ignores basic human nature. In all likelihood any English rugby league ref will have become a ref because he is a fan of RL. Almost all fans of RL will have been fans of the national side.

Thaler almost certainly fits into this category yet he is now expected to referee this side that he used to support completely bias free. Everybody there is aware of the potential for this bias and this inevitably affects his decision making. Do you think 100% that Ganson would have sent an Australian off after 12 seconds of a test? I personally think he was trying to appear unbiased.

[Padge]

His point was that - if England football team were playing, eg Scotland, Germany , France or whoever, it would be almost unthinkable to have a non neutral ref, especially with how the respect for the ref is so poor in football. The dummy would probably be hurtled out of the pram by the players and media if (for example) in the next Euro championship an English ref awarded a contentious last minute penalty against Scotland.

 

For what it’s worth, I thought Thaler did ref the game well, but if he’d made a couple of bad decisions that cost the Kiwis the game, the fact that the ref wasn’t neutral would potentially be an issue.

 

And my point is that I, like Dave T, never get asked about these contentious issues in the way that the anti-lobby seem to.

 

I have never come across the Four Kiwis of the Apocalypse. 

[Maximus Decimus]

His point was that - if England football team were playing, eg Scotland, Germany , France or whoever, it would be almost unthinkable to have a non neutral ref, especially with how the respect for the ref is so poor in football. The dummy would probably be hurtled out of the pram by the players and media if (for example) in the next Euro championship an English ref awarded a contentious last minute penalty against Scotland.

 

For what it’s worth, I thought Thaler did ref the game well, but if he’d made a couple of bad decisions that cost the Kiwis the game, the fact that the ref wasn’t neutral would potentially be an issue.

 

Whilst I personally don't think a referee can eliminate bias, even if they could it's just common sense to pick a neutral ref to diminish the possibility of bias. Referees sometimes make the wrong decision in important games which can cause a great deal of frustration amongst fans, players and coaches. What you don't want is for this bad decision to be blamed on bias, this is why most sports wouldn't consider non-neutral referees.

 

We don't always have the option in RL, which is a sad fact of life. NZ and France just don't have the quality of referee necessary. However, there is simply no excuse when England are playing NZ to not have neutral referees for all the games. 

[DoubleD]

This type of thinking ignores basic human nature. In all likelihood any English rugby league ref will have become a ref because he is a fan of RL. Almost all fans of RL will have been fans of the national side.

Thaler almost certainly fits into this category yet he is now expected to referee this side that he used to support completely bias free. Everybody there is aware of the potential for this bias and this inevitably affects his decision making. Do you think 100% that Ganson would have sent an Australian off after 12 seconds of a test? I personally think he was trying to appear unbiased.

So you've just proved your argument wrong, the fact that Ganson sent off his own country man. Refs can take a dislike to a player, that's a form of bias. Ganson may have just not liked Morley and gone off his reputation hence sending him off. It also doesn't address the fact that NRL and Super League refs referee slightly differently - is that another bias?

Refs want to be the best they can be in their profession. They are monitored so closely and judged that any form of national bias would be self defeating

[Maximus Decimus]

So you've just proved your argument wrong, the fact that Ganson sent off his own country man. Refs can take a dislike to a player, that's a form of bias. Ganson may have just not liked Morley and gone off his reputation hence sending him off. It also doesn't address the fact that NRL and Super League refs referee slightly differently - is that another bias?

Refs want to be the best they can be in their profession. They are monitored so closely and judged that any form of national bias would be self defeating

 

You are thinking too simplistically IMO. Bias can work both ways, I believe Ganson was trying too hard to appear unbiased that it ended up having the opposite effect.

 

Of course referees have all sorts of biases and always will but there are none as clear or obvious as nationality. With the Ganson case, people can speculate all they like about whether he dislikes players or certain clubs but there is no ambiguity about his nationality. He is British and therefore almost certainly spent a large portion of it supporting Britain. Everybody in the ground and on TV know this is the case and this is bound to have a great effect on how he referees the game.

 

With refereeing you are trying your hardest to eliminate any potential bias. I look at an incident like the Hall no try last year; it was absurd that you had a situation where an Australian was being asked to make a controversial decision that would have sent shockwaves through Australian RL (resulting in them not even making a final). The actual decision and whether it was correct or not is irrelevant. If he had given the controversial decision it could have personally affected him quite a lot. Don't forget, he would have had to live in Australia through the backlash. There is the very real possibility that this crossed his mind, or at least could have done, as he was making the decision.

 

There is a good reason that any sport that can afford to have purely neutral refs does so.

[Padge]

I was once talking to Ian Smith after he had been refereeing a Wigan game in Catalan, I said that there was only one decision in the game I didn't get. He explained it very well, his decision then made sense. Just before I left him to enjoy his beer he said "What fans don't get is that refs don't give a Zh!t about the result". 

[Dave T]

You are thinking too simplistically IMO. Bias can work both ways, I believe Ganson was trying too hard to appear unbiased that it ended up having the opposite effect.

 

Of course referees have all sorts of biases and always will but there are none as clear or obvious as nationality. With the Ganson case, people can speculate all they like about whether he dislikes players or certain clubs but there is no ambiguity about his nationality. He is British and therefore almost certainly spent a large portion of it supporting Britain. Everybody in the ground and on TV know this is the case and this is bound to have a great effect on how he referees the game.

 

With refereeing you are trying your hardest to eliminate any potential bias. I look at an incident like the Hall no try last year; it was absurd that you had a situation where an Australian was being asked to make a controversial decision that would have sent shockwaves through Australian RL (resulting in them not even making a final). The actual decision and whether it was correct or not is irrelevant. If he had given the controversial decision it could have personally affected him quite a lot. Don't forget, he would have had to live in Australia through the backlash. There is the very real possibility that this crossed his mind, or at least could have done, as he was making the decision.

 

There is a good reason that any sport that can afford to have purely neutral refs does so.

Ultimately, while I agree with Padge around refs being neutral, the issue is with perception, and ultimately, neutral refs are seen as the 'norm' in international sport, and non-neutral refs are unpalatable to some fans (or customers).

[Futtocks]

When the Kangaroos are involved, British referees are usually been the victims of a very familiar campaign of denigration by the Aussie camp in the run-up to the match. Ken Arthurson and Bob Fulton were masters of that back in the day, but it still goes on. A British referee usually ends up bending over backwards to avoid any accusations of bias (which they get anyway, regardless of their decisions or the result).

 

Aussie referees have no qualms at all about being seen as biased. And, on the other side of the argument, the GB/England camp don't hold press conferences where they hold forth about how non-British refs aren't up to the job and are liable to show a deliberate or unconscious preference for one team over the other.

[Maximus Decimus]

Ultimately, while I agree with Padge around refs being neutral, the issue is with perception, and ultimately, neutral refs are seen as the 'norm' in international sport, and non-neutral refs are unpalatable to some fans (or customers).

Whilst I agree that perceptions are important I also think that their non-neutral status has too great an effect on their performance, ranging from subconscious favouritism to trying to appear unbiased to out and out bias. After all, referees are individuals. The scope for out an out bias is greatly increased with a hometown referee.

To my knowledge there has only been one study into this and unsurprisingly confirmed the gut feeling of many. A group from Cambridge, studied the 2009 Super 14 season (92 games) and the Catalan Dragons from 2006-09 (around 120 games).

Whilst the sample is quite low the results were fairly clear. In SL, Catalans won 38% of the time with a British ref but 75% with an Aussie or French ref. This also transferred to penalty counts and cards.

In the Union, if a home team had a home ref they won 91% of the time, if the ref was the same as the away team they won 38% of the time. Quite a difference.

[deluded pom?]

Some of the French refs who officiated in France v England/GB in the 1970s and 1980s were notoriously biased. Read some of the reports of Kangaroo tour matches in France and the disbelief at some of the decisions made against the Australians.

[DoubleD]

Some of the French refs who officiated in France v England/GB in the 1970s and 1980s were notoriously biased. Read some of the reports of Kangaroo tour matches in France and the disbelief at some of the decisions made against the Australians.

 

Never like the Australians to moan though is it?  

 

The professionalism and TV/media focus on refs performance means it's far less of an issue now

[DoubleD]

Whilst I agree that perceptions are important I also think that their non-neutral status has too great an effect on their performance, ranging from subconscious favouritism to trying to appear unbiased to out and out bias. After all, referees are individuals. The scope for out an out bias is greatly increased with a hometown referee.

To my knowledge there has only been one study into this and unsurprisingly confirmed the gut feeling of many. A group from Cambridge, studied the 2009 Super 14 season (92 games) and the Catalan Dragons from 2006-09 (around 120 games).

Whilst the sample is quite low the results were fairly clear. In SL, Catalans won 38% of the time with a British ref but 75% with an Aussie or French ref. This also transferred to penalty counts and cards.

In the Union, if a home team had a home ref they won 91% of the time, if the ref was the same as the away team they won 38% of the time. Quite a difference.

 

Didn't Thierry Alibert mainly ref Dragons home games? The Dragons are notoriously strong at home and poor away which explains those results, nowt to do with the spurious data relating to the nationality of the ref

[Padge]

Ultimately, while I agree with Padge around refs being neutral, the issue is with perception, and ultimately, neutral refs are seen as the 'norm' in international sport, and non-neutral refs are unpalatable to some fans (or customers).

 

I would love it if we could have neutral refs all the time for internationals.  Truth of the matter is that we can't. We don't have the quality spread across enough nations.

 

I think as long as the situation exists that we have then the top refs that we have should be in a panel of international of referees and the are then selected at random by lottery.

 

The "international  board" should select or ask for top referees (outside of England and Oz) to volunteer for scholarships where they have the opportunity to be developed into international referees. They would spend time in both  hemispheres continually learning the game until they are at a standard to ref in both senior competitions.

[Dave T]

I would love it if we could have neutral refs all the time for internationals.  Truth of the matter is that we can't. We don't have the quality spread across enough nations.

 

I think as long as the situation exists that we have then the top refs that we have should be in a panel of international of referees and the are then selected at random by lottery.

 

The "international  board" should select or ask for top referees (outside of England and Oz) to volunteer for scholarships where they have the opportunity to be developed into international referees. They would spend time in both  hemispheres continually learning the game until they are at a standard to ref in both senior competitions.

Agree with most of that, probably apart from the lottery, but even that may be better than the current nonsense voting process.

[Padge]

Agree with most of that, probably apart from the lottery, but even that may be better than the current nonsense voting process.

 

I think its better than the Aussies dictating who they want for particular games, when the chips are down and they are in danger of losing a series or competition they ALWAYS dig their heals in about the ref.

 

Just draw the ref from the pool and take your luck. 

[deluded pom?]

I would love it if we could have neutral refs all the time for internationals.  Truth of the matter is that we can't. We don't have the quality spread across enough nations.

 

I think as long as the situation exists that we have then the top refs that we have should be in a panel of international of referees and the are then selected at random by lottery.

 

The "international  board" should select or ask for top referees (outside of England and Oz) to volunteer for scholarships where they have the opportunity to be developed into international referees. They would spend time in both  hemispheres continually learning the game until they are at a standard to ref in both senior competitions.

There's a Kiwi ref in the NRL, Henry Perenara. That gives us three professional refs, each of a different nationality. We can have neutral refs if we wanted to.

[Padge]

There's a Kiwi ref in the NRL, Henry Perenara. That gives us three professional refs, each of a different nationality. We can have neutral refs if we wanted to.

 

The problem is though with Parenara he will always ref to the Southern Hemisphere interpretation, just as an SL ref will be inclined to NH interpretation.

 

Until we have a panel of refs who have been trained in how the games differ slightly and can use an international interpretation we are were we are.

 

Neutral isn't just about being a different nationality its also about the competition you would normally referee in.

 

I would take my draw idea even further and only draw the referee one hour before kick off.

[Maximus Decimus]

Didn't Thierry Alibert mainly ref Dragons home games? The Dragons are notoriously strong at home and poor away which explains those results, nowt to do with the spurious data relating to the nationality of the ref

 

Talking of bias, here is a clear example of confirmation bias. You've already decided that referees do not need to be neutral so are able to write off a report that you haven't even read with a made up fact. 

 

Thierry Alibert refereed 3 Dragons games between 2006 and 2009. 

 

Don't get me wrong, the report is far from perfect but it certainly makes for interesting reading. For instance the Dragons won 37% of games with an English ref but this went up to 50% if the game was on TV. I would like a follow up and more extensive study. 

[deluded pom?]

The problem is though with Parenara he will always ref to the Southern Hemisphere interpretation, just as an SL ref will be inclined to NH interpretation.

 

Until we have a panel of refs who have been trained in how the games differ slightly and can use an international interpretation we are were we are.

 

Neutral isn't just about being a different nationality its also about the competition you would normally referee in.

 

I would take my draw idea even further and only draw the referee one hour before kick off.

With only two pro comps in the world it's a bit much expecting a ref who doesn't officiate in either comp to take charge of major Test matches.