Jump to content

Referees ‘coaching ‘


Recommended Posts

Why do referees feel the need to influence what players do?  Shouting five, five, five continually when a team doesn’t kick the ball immediately or shout forty, forty.. when it looks like a player is just going to let the ball into touch for a forty twenty. Also continually telling someone there offside, all these could be said ONCE but not over and over, let the players decide what they are going to do then apply the rules. 

The referees have enough to do without coaching the players!

f3gms4.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites


11 minutes ago, weloveyouwakefield2 said:

Why do referees feel the need to influence what players do?  Shouting five, five, five continually when a team doesn’t kick the ball immediately or shout forty, forty.. when it looks like a player is just going to let the ball into touch for a forty twenty. Also continually telling someone there offside, all these could be said ONCE but not over and over, let the players decide what they are going to do then apply the rules. 

The referees have enough to do without coaching the players!

They do it to try to keep the game flowing. We don't want to see dozens of penalties every game. Much better to try to stop the offence happening in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MZH said:

They do it to try to keep the game flowing. We don't want to see dozens of penalties every game. Much better to try to stop the offence happening in the first place.

Spot on.

The ref has a duty to keep the game flowing as well as enforcing, when necessary, the laws of the game.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, weloveyouwakefield2 said:

Why do referees feel the need to influence what players do?  Shouting five, five, five continually when a team doesn’t kick the ball immediately or shout forty, forty.. when it looks like a player is just going to let the ball into touch for a forty twenty. Also continually telling someone there offside, all these could be said ONCE but not over and over, let the players decide what they are going to do then apply the rules. 

The referees have enough to do without coaching the players!

They aren't coaching they are warning.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MZH said:

They do it to try to keep the game flowing. We don't want to see dozens of penalties every game. Much better to try to stop the offence happening in the first place.

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried, the fact that players are not left to make the decisions themselves without the ref telling them or the player waiting for the ref to tell them is precisely why there are so many penalties, this is basic human psychology 101. This is replicated in other walks of life.

You put the onus of responsibility to change the behaviour onto the person potentially committing the offence, make them think about their actions and the potential punishment. Remove the commands by the ref to how we used to have it and yes, penalties would increase BUT players and coaches would have to adapt very, very quickly IF the officials are penalising every time they should be or be completely penalised out of a game. It wouldn't take long!

Examples. Ref shouts "mooooove", player/s looks up, waits a few more seconds and then gets off, ref does nothing, player does exactly the same ad-infinitum, pushing even more as to how long they can hold a player down until they get penalised. Previously, ref says nothing, player takes too long, ref penalises, player has to be more cautious as he has no prompt, it's he/they having to make the decision as to when to get off. It's no surprise that the PTB was far less messy and faster.

Also the same to offsides from a kick downfield, players have to make better judgement, ref can then spend more time looking at what's occurring for players onside not looking and instructing players who are blithely running downfield/into the 10 knowing full well they are offside. Penalise a player offside and continue to do it until players get the message. Also penalise players who encroach from an offside position when the receiving player hasn't moved 10m which happens far too often!

You stop the offence happening in the first place more often by putting the onus onto the player to make the decision as to when to move/act in whatever aspect of the game that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again, referees are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Too many penalties spoils the game, too few also spoils the game. Who'd be a ref?

The problem with your example is that defenders are allowed different amounts of time in the tackle. A defender in a "dominant" or "surrender" tackle is given more leeway than, say, the defender who makes a desperation tackle after a line break. Do we really want the players guessing the referees interpretation of the tackle and hence how long they can stay in the ruck?

Warn players if there are about to infringe, penalise them if they do. Keep the game flowing.

As for the shout of "40, 40..." on 40-20 attempts, that could also be for the other officials so they know what the call is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

How is a player supposed to know what a referee is thinking?

....

How on earth do you expect a player to play to a referees interpretations if the referee keeps them to himself?

What an astoundingly ridiculous thing to say. Take it to its logical conclusion and see how much sense it makes.

The sport has allowed itself to drift into sacrificing far too much in the search of a faster flowing game. If it needs doing, be brave enough to change the laws, not an individual’s interpretation of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Cerulean said:

What an astoundingly ridiculous thing to say. Take it to its logical conclusion and see how much sense it makes.

The sport has allowed itself to drift into sacrificing far too much in the search of a faster flowing game. If it needs doing, be brave enough to change the laws, not an individual’s interpretation of them.

The ref would have have a stop watch running on every tackle.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ELBOWSEYE said:

When I read the title I thought it was about the excellent coaching received by referees from players like sinfield, briers and wilkin.

There’s a separate thread on Cameron Smith ... he’s the daddy he can coach two at the same time 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SL17 said:

A windmill for Hull KR this evening for three penalties on the bounce. Five for Leeds and just a slap on the wrist.

Consistency?

List me what all the penalties were for, where on the pitch they were, the time period between them, tell me what the ref said to players when he gave the penalties to individual players and I may be able to comment. Without all the information it is just the ref doing his job as far as I'm concerned.

Ever been a referee at a decent level?

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

 

It's like some people have never even been in the same hemisphere as an actual game never mind watched or played it. It is utterly astonishing that anyone with any game experience whatsoever would think less communication between referee and player would make a better game

You are easily astonished, aren't you? Please consider that their may just occasionally be a tiny element of validity in the opinions of those with whom you disagree.

Watched, played, taught, coached RL for decades. I found that coaching from the touchline had little effect: players were a little too busy to listen. I found that when refereeing, the less said, the better: in most walks of life, repeat the same comments over and over again for long enough and it becomes meaningless twaddle. Forum behaviour show that.

I watched Leeds v HKR on tv last night with, for once, the sound on. The referee pestered, coached advised, instructed, announced, admonished from before the kick-off and throughout with hardly a pause for breath. It didn’t seem to enhance the flow of play, or stop Leeds with their hands on the ball at the end of the tackle, or moving off the mark when playing the ball. In fact, for all that he said, I saw little modification in behaviour throughout: perhaps he should have said more. At least HKR enhanced the flow with adventurous play and entertaining rugby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Padge said:

 

Ever been a referee at a decent level?

Yes I have, and there are some good points above and some absolute cobblers, but I’ll just give one anecdote, end of season game, two mid table teams, effectively nowt to play for. I’m having this very conversation with the two coaches before the game, they make a suggestion, why don’t I penalise everything I see rather than giving warnings about “next time” etc.

So I do, for 10 minutes at which point I decide to abandon the experiment as we’ve already had a penalty a minute.

if this is what you as fans want then so be it but I don’t think you do, do you? 

"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Phil said:

Yes I have, and there are some good points above and some absolute cobblers, but I’ll just give one anecdote, end of season game, two mid table teams, effectively nowt to play for. I’m having this very conversation with the two coaches before the game, they make a suggestion, why don’t I penalise everything I see rather than giving warnings about “next time” etc.

So I do, for 10 minutes at which point I decide to abandon the experiment as we’ve already had a penalty a minute.

if this is what you as fans want then so be it but I don’t think you do, do you? 

That's a load of bollards Phil, it must have been more than one per minute. ?

?

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com

Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007

Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Phil said:

Yes I have, and there are some good points above and some absolute cobblers, but I’ll just give one anecdote, end of season game, two mid table teams, effectively nowt to play for. I’m having this very conversation with the two coaches before the game, they make a suggestion, why don’t I penalise everything I see rather than giving warnings about “next time” etc.

So I do, for 10 minutes at which point I decide to abandon the experiment as we’ve already had a penalty a minute.

if this is what you as fans want then so be it but I don’t think you do, do you? 

yep, a problem.. No problem with warning as long as next time it is penalised. 

Although by not penalising your giving that teams a helping hand or another way penalising the other team for letting the team that get a warning to get away with it.   Penalties make a huge momentum benefit to a team... thats the underlying problem

If a player knows its typically a warning at least the first time, then surely they don't try to "behave" and it becomes the way you play, as surely penalties makes them have to learn/behave eventually.   Of course needs all ref's and backing from administrators (RFL etc) if its going to work as no doubt initially for a few weeks loads of moaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Padge said:

That's a load of bollards Phil, it must have been more than one per minute. ?

?

It probably was, this is years ago now 

"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/07/2019 at 11:28, Dunedan said:

Once again, referees are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Too many penalties spoils the game, too few also spoils the game. Who'd be a ref?

The problem with your example is that defenders are allowed different amounts of time in the tackle. A defender in a "dominant" or "surrender" tackle is given more leeway than, say, the defender who makes a desperation tackle after a line break. Do we really want the players guessing the referees interpretation of the tackle and hence how long they can stay in the ruck?

Warn players if there are about to infringe, penalise them if they do. Keep the game flowing.

As for the shout of "40, 40..." on 40-20 attempts, that could also be for the other officials so they know what the call is.

As I explained, penalising all the time may well make the spectacle poor to start with, however players/coaches have to change otherwise they'll get marched downfield and get next to no posession. It doesn't spoil the game, it's the players spoiling the game. When the players play within the laws, and they will have to more often because they know the ref won't prompt and won't not penalise, then the game will improve very, very rapidly.

Human beings are predictable, we see how the example of making people taking responsibility for change of behaviour based on knowing they will absolutely be punished every single time does work. An example of why motorists drive like morons most of the time is because like rugby players they know they can get with it more often than not, actually massive disparity in getting caught to not, hence why so many people die/get maimed. Whilst the ultimate outcome is different (people not getting killed on the pitch), the psychology is identical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely agree with the OP, it does my head in when you hear the Ref's constantly shouting at the players to stop doing something or to do something, the players at pro level must surely already know the rules and should therefore adhere to them off their own backs, maybe at a junior level it could be utilised a little.

There was one game where the ref shouted 'play the ball' to an attacker who was trying to milk a penalty or waste time 4 times before he actually did, surely a pro RL player will know he has to do this anyway and after refusing 3 previous times surely this is should be penalised?

Another tonight where the Ref shouted 'markers you're not square', they didn't move but he just let them stay there anyway - again if you've seen them offending penalise them, especially if they don't respond to your calls.

 

To me the problem is the players know they can push the officials a lot further than they used to and the ref's have almost become on field coaches to the players rather than an authoritive figure, the players are coached from an early age and regularly during the week so surely shouldn't need to be told what to do on the field on a matchday.

If they are committing an offence penalise them for it rather than just telling them they are !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m waiting for a ref to say ‘ play it with your foot ‘ .... I’ve noticed quite often they say ‘ don’t move off the mark ‘ although it seems pointless as they never do anything about it . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SL17 said:

The question? Is consistency!  3 on the bounce obviously outweighs 5 on the bounce.

Too many grey areas..

It all depends on whether the penalties were for technical infringements or foul play, it's not as black and white as you think, ask a referee how team warnings work and you may be surprised at the reality of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/07/2019 at 17:23, scotchy1 said:

The laws.are the individuals interpretation of them.

You play to the referees whistle. It's the one the first things you are ever taught. 

It's like some people have never even been in the same hemisphere as an actual game never mind watched or played it. It is utterly astonishing that anyone with any game experience whatsoever would think less communication between referee and player would make a better game

Sorry but you're wrong and clearly don't understand human psychology. We've tried it your way and things have gotten worse, we've tried it your way in various facets of life and it's got worse. Please for goodness sakes go ask someone with a modicum of understanding on the matter to explain to you why you're wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Confirmation bias in its purest form here.

How do you know that if the referee had communicated less with leeds, they wouldn't have offended more?

The simple fact of the matter is that Leeds broke the rules even when knowing the referees interpretation of them, it's silly to think they would have broke  them fewer times if they had no idea what the referees interpretation was.

And confirmation bias by yourself, of course.

The simple fact of the matter is that Leeds and all other teams would break the rules less often if the expectation of sanctions was higher. 

No more "debate" with you. You appear to be one of those who needs the last word. Please indulge yourself: I promise not to reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too hate the continual 'coaching' by referees, it's a blight on the game to my mind and if it was achieving anything you wouldn't see penalties given for the calling the referees make, player's ignore it and then look dumfounded when penalised. They should know the rules and if they transgress penalised them. Maybe it's because I'm a old git and remember that's the way it used to be but like lot's of other things everbody has to be mollycoddled nowadays.

As for saying about calling the fifth tackle or onside on kicks downfield these were indicated by signals, and a great play was made about these and others being to inform the spectators what the ruling was, now it seems the coaches have deemed that player's can't take their eyes off play to see what the referree is signalling and must be given a verbal instruction for everything, next we will have refs sending text messages to each player!

One final thought, all this has come about due to the 'miking up' of referees, do we really need it? The great god of soccer doesn't see the need for it so why do we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.