Refereeing (Multiple Merged Threads)

[AB90]

1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

The collisions between Union forwards are horrible.  The ball carrier tends to bend at the waist and have his head lower or level with his hips in order to find the ground and not be held upright (which is a turnover) while the defenders have this 'chop' tackle where they throw themselves at the lower leg, often without wrapping.  The result of these two actions is players clashing heads because they are in the same body position.

Anyway, back to League.  The NRL study showed two things which are not particularly intuitive and go against traditional thinking.

1.  HIAs were 1.74 fold greater for the tacklers than for the ball carrier which means that foul play is nowhere near the leading cause of HIA's and it is accidental collisions (head on head, head on hip etc) that leads to most HIA's.  Of course we should clamp down on foul play but RL will have HIA's for as long as it is played.

2. There was a 3.2 fold higher risk for an HIA when the tackler was upright compared to bent at the waist.  As you say, a lot of players have suffered HIA's when bent at the waist.  What we don't see here is the relative severity of the injury caused.  I have no evidence to back this up but my viewing of the game for many years leads me to think that the injuries where the tacklers get their head in the wrong place on a hips tackle are more serious than the head clashes of upright tackles (overall of course, not individual incidents).

Yeah it’s interesting that when we talk about concussions we only ever discuss the ball carrier when the research/data is pretty clear that circa 70% of head knocks and concussions occur to the defender making the tackle. 

I agree with you on point 2. 

 

[fighting irish]

4 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

Hi Daz, not sure if that was aimed at me or not but imagine it was 

I'm not a journalist as such, I have a day job. We run an independent little show, the Dockhouse Rugby Show all out of our own pockets supported by DHM whose studio we use.

The Facebook group is really just to promote our show, more eyes hopefully lead to a sponsor .

You will see from my posts on here and other SM platforms that I am very supportive of officials, as demonstrated in my latest video, Dockhouse Rugby Shorts 

I've ran several polls, they seem quite popular, and actually show that despite many SM posts being negative towards officials and RL in general, majority of people believe they do a good job. So this information can be used to show those who claim "refs are killing the game and everyone knows it" that thier view is actually the minority.

If you check out some of our episodes hopefully you will see they are quite well thought out, hopefully that comes through but I do spend a lot of time researching each episode. We have three more recorded and waiting to be edited, this is time consuming and expensive, whilst we have no direct income we relay on favours and are behind people who pay. 

Thanks, Dave (Dockhouse Dave)

 

I've got stick for this video for supporting refs.

Keep up the good work mate. The voice of reason, in the land of nut-jobs. 

[RigbyLuger]

14 hours ago, Jughead said:

Depressing how coaches and players are swinging punches at refs and the disciplinary. Round 3. This games self sabotage tendencies astounds me. Fine and ban any player or coach who traps off next. 

Jackson Hastings was questioning the decisions again on twitter. Needs to concentrate on his career down under before he gets sent back here again!

[Archie Gordon]

6 hours ago, Dunbar said:

...

Anyway, back to League.  The NRL study showed two things which are not particularly intuitive and go against traditional thinking.

1.  HIAs were 1.74 fold greater for the tacklers than for the ball carrier which means that foul play is nowhere near the leading cause of HIA's and it is accidental collisions (head on head, head on hip etc) that leads to most HIA's.  Of course we should clamp down on foul play but RL will have HIA's for as long as it is played.

2. There was a 3.2 fold higher risk for an HIA when the tackler was upright compared to bent at the waist.  

...

Yeah. Always worth remembering that targeting foul play by the tackler will only reduce head knocks by a small/moderate amount. Still worth doing.

But I still feel that the smartest fix is to reduce full-pace contact in training and ration the number of games played by each player.

[Jughead]

1 hour ago, RigbyLuger said:

Jackson Hastings was questioning the decisions again on twitter. Needs to concentrate on his career down under before he gets sent back here again!

He’ll be back in 12-18 months anyway. 

[metallithrax]

Not sure how the culture can be changed, but I don't think adverts like this one will help.  This is from a 1920's Huddersfield Town football program.

[meast]

On 24/02/2022 at 11:01, Dave T said:

He's talking nonsense isn't he. 

Justifying his own actions for causing a scuffle around the late challenge that wasn't late and being penalised for it. 

I'm finding some aspects of RL a bit depressing right now, we are looking more and more like a small time boys club full of whinging bullies who don't like being told off. 

The criticism from clubs, journos and players from certain groups is small time and if I'm being cynical, all looking rather coordinated when you see some of the terminology being repeated by different people. 

And then we wonder why we don't get any worthy positive coverage of the game.

Maybe if we focused more on the product on the field instead of the referees, rules etc we might just stand a chance?

[Dave T]

Just now, meast said:

And then we wonder why we don't get any worthy positive coverage of the game.

Maybe if we focused more on the product on the field instead of the referees, rules etc we might just stand a chance?

I don't have too much of an issue with debates about decisions and controversial points, that's half of the fun and controversy sells and gets you coverage. 

But the level of discussion by some in the media has been really dumb, boiling down to "let us keep hitting each other illegally, the games gone soft". 

There is interesting discussion to be had, Ive enjoyed the debates on the couple of recent threads, but the quality of complaints from journos and players has been far worse than what we've seen on these boards. 

[Dave T]

Another low 'high tackle' there. Not tmassively dissimilar to the Hep Cahill one discussed earlier that was red a few years back. This was similar but less dangerous, so yellow. 

Seems consistent. 

[LeeF]

27 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Another low 'high tackle' there. Not tmassively dissimilar to the Hep Cahill one discussed earlier that was red a few years back. This was similar but less dangerous, so yellow. 

Seems consistent. 

Stop showing the naysayers up with evidence

[LeeF]

1 hour ago, metallithrax said:

Not sure how the culture can be changed, but I don't think adverts like this one will help.  This is from a 1920's Huddersfield Town football program.

Just proves that there is nothing new in this world

[daz39]

No, he's simply jumping on the current trend of players and 'journalists' having a go at Ref's, it's almost as if they're choreographed to have a different one saying the same thing via a different media outlet every day now.

[DavidM]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I don't have too much of an issue with debates about decisions and controversial points, that's half of the fun and controversy sells and gets you coverage. 

But the level of discussion by some in the media has been really dumb, boiling down to "let us keep hitting each other illegally, the games gone soft". 

There is interesting discussion to be had, Ive enjoyed the debates on the couple of recent threads, but the quality of complaints from journos and players has been far worse than what we've seen on these boards. 

True Dave , i dont mind being wrong , but i like debate and at least being interesting , articulate and wrong !

[RayCee]

I ask because at a French RL forum, there has always been a belief bt many (not all) that the refs favour English sides over the Dragons. Getting to the point of the thread, there is now a shift at said forum toward some saying that a certain top club in England is getting all the 50/50 calls regardless of who they are playing. I didn't mention the obvious name of the accused as I don't want this to become a club issue. However, do officials subconsciously give a side with a winning reputation more calls in their favour?

I know that's the feeling with me this happens when the Kangaroos play, even with a neutral ref. Their aura seems to work for them when tight decisions are made.

Refs are human and we all can have subconscious reactions based on preconceived ideas that we aren't even aware of. However, I do feel with modern scrutiny of the modern game, if an official was statistically favouring a certain team or teams, it would eventually be noticed and drawn to his attention. I hope that would happen anyway. 

[Dallas Mead]

No.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Yes, Saints do get all the calls.

[Whippet13]

3 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Yes, Saints do get all the calls.

Rubbish, they get 99% at best.

[TheFlash]

I think they do.

You only need to listen to the language used towards the different teams in Challenge Cup ties. If it is a SuperLeague team, you can hear a certain familiarity laced with tolerance... "Get square Alex", "Drop your tackle height Zak" or whatever.

When the likes of Doncaster are on, it is more like "listen number 6... I am the ref out here" etc etc. 

Also, I happen to think the fans on the French forum are correct. Catalans for me, have definitely been refereed more strictly than any other club over the last X years. It is just a gut feeling, but it keeps surfacing whenever I watch their games. I am not a Catalans fan, but I definitely notice it. 

[RayCee]

2 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Yes, Saints do get all the calls.

Have those charged with supervising the officials not picked up on this or are they in on it too?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

5 minutes ago, RayCee said:

Have those charged with supervising the officials not picked up on this or are they in on it too?

That is also subconscious.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

6 minutes ago, TheFlash said:

I think they do.

You only need to listen to the language used towards the different teams in Challenge Cup ties. If it is a SuperLeague team, you can hear a certain familiarity laced with tolerance... "Get square Alex", "Drop your tackle height Zak" or whatever.

When the likes of Doncaster are on, it is more like "listen number 6... I am the ref out here" etc etc. 

Also, I happen to think the fans on the French forum are correct. Catalans for me, have definitely been refereed more strictly than any other club over the last X years. It is just a gut feeling, but it keeps surfacing whenever I watch their games. I am not a Catalans fan, but I definitely notice it. 

They've done better since adding bigger name English players to their side, haven't you noticed? Refs are more pally with them now.

[Pigeon Lofter]

Catalans do seem to get punished frequently for seemingly innocuous or borderline behaviour, I've noticed it happening for years. I doubt it is a deliberate prejudice from referees, so perhaps refs do have a subconscious bias against them-as outrageous as that seems to be.

Will be fascinating at the RLWC to see how many times UK players get pinged at the PTB, SL players haven't been doing it correctly for years and rarely get sanctioned but will be up against nations who do it correctly every time. Will refs have the cojones to penalise the Super Leaguers at every PTB or will the laws be applied rarely and selectively at the WC? Surely not?

[RayCee]

If you look at the highlights of the Catalan Leeds match, the second try for the Catalan side comes after a push on a defending Leeds player that is clearly illegal. The referee said it was fine and allowed the try. Yet no one at the French forum noticed that. It's too easy to think every call that goes in favour of your team is fair and any going against you is a biased decision. 

[The Rocket]

6 hours ago, RayCee said:

I know that's the feeling with me this happens when the Kangaroos play, even with a neutral ref. Their aura seems to work for them when tight decisions are made.

I know RayCee when I watch a game where an underdog is involved, which is especially the case often when the Kangaroos are playing, and I want the less fancied team to do well, I`ll often find myself cursing the referee when a penalty is given for what might seem a borderline call against that team. I`ll find myself shouting things like: " C`mon ref, give them a break " or " Christ it`s hard enough as it is "   but whether this constitutes a bias towards the favoured team by the referee is probably unlikely, more likely a perception created by my wanting the less favoured team to do well. Maybe some don`t differentiate between those two things especially when strong emotions are involved.

To complicate matters the other issue of course is that teams under the pump are probably more likely through fatigue or trying to halt the momentum of the opposing side to push the boundaries on certain things or make mistakes leading to lop-sided penalty counts.

 

[JohnM]

Oh goodie. Another thread about refs.