Referees explaining decisions

[DavidM]

Do we need to hear the ref mic the entire 80 minutes ? One … moooove … release … two …. mooove … you’re offside Smithy …. Don’t mooove of the mark … three … kick … clear etc etc . I mean really ? Can we not just hear some pertinent snippets 

[jacksy]

4 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Do we need to hear the ref mic the entire 80 minutes ? One … moooove … release … two …. mooove … you’re offside Smithy …. Don’t mooove of the mark … three … kick … clear etc etc . I mean really ? Can we not just hear some pertinent 

On top of the mindless sky commentary. Total turn off.

[Oxford]

6 hours ago, barnyia said:

the French struggle due to lots of union on TV,

If that's a problem it's easily solved tell them they can't possibly improve their game by watching so inferior a product.

Ask Keith.

 

[Morris Wanchuk]

I’d certainly be interested if they interviewed the ref’s after the match to explain their decisions, great viewing! 

[David Dockhouse Host]

When trying to engage with people slagging off refs you get replies like this. There is a refusal to accept an alternate veiw or to engage in reasonable discussion.

There are others with childish name calling. 

And what are 'honest mistakes'? How does a fan compare these to dishonest mistakes? How do you spot them? 

[David Dockhouse Host]

I find a typical frustration for fans is lieing on, but that's down to the ball carrier going down too easily or quickly, explained here.

Who new the A, B and C of a ruck? I didn't before this, makes sense to me though.

https://youtu.be/88x5jbPNC8Y

 

 

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

When trying to engage with people slagging off refs you get replies like this. There is a refusal to accept an alternate veiw or to engage in reasonable discussion.

There are others with childish name calling. 

The engagement with people on t'internet is frought and not just about refs.

People don't tend to do well with reasonable discussion partly because they're not always reasoned in their approach to the things they feel strongly about.

It's not just posters who cut off dialogue because they can't cope with other viewpoints.

[David Dockhouse Host]

3 hours ago, Oxford said:

The engagement with people on t'internet is frought and not just about refs.

People don't tend to do well with reasonable discussion partly because they're not always reasoned in their approach to the things they feel strongly about.

It's not just posters who cut off dialogue because they can't cope with other viewpoints.

"Bore off with your rubbish" was a particularly confrontational start

[Oxford]

7 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

"Bore off with your rubbish" was a particularly confrontational start

But Dave that was the best bit.

And we can't complain when lots of posters tend towards this sort of thing on the one hand and discussions are shut down on the other.

That's not the stuff of grown up discussion and yes it can be difficult navigating though social media for everyone involved but a sense of balance is as AWOL as political parties in every crisis.

Edited August 14, 2022 by Oxford

[Oxford]

13 hours ago, Morris Wanchuk said:

I’d certainly be interested if they interviewed the ref’s after the match to explain their decisions, great viewing! 

Along with F1 crashes the horses knocking the obstacles down and the traditional pile up at the Grand national to name just a few!

[David Dockhouse Host]

14 hours ago, Morris Wanchuk said:

I’d certainly be interested if they interviewed the ref’s after the match to explain their decisions, great viewing! 

What would they say?

I saw a knock on so blew the whistle?

They call what they see, if it's an error and it turns out it wasn't a knock on then they would still say that's what they saw.

[Copa]

23 hours ago, barnyia said:

 

It could help fans understand the rules more, it could definitely help the French fans who blame the ref a lot. 

My son played soccer in France. He said he perfected French insults because many fans always blame the ref regardless of the quality of the decisions. 

[Copa]

17 hours ago, DavidM said:

Do we need to hear the ref mic the entire 80 minutes ? One … moooove … release … two …. mooove … you’re offside Smithy …. Don’t mooove of the mark … three … kick … clear etc etc . I mean really ? Can we not just hear some pertinent snippets 

We can do that in Australia while in the stadium.

https://www.sportsears.com.au/rugbyleague

[daz39]

How about we just give fans - heck even coaches and owners a basic rulebook every year with their season cards and tell them to read it before the season starts, just maybe some of the thicker ones who boo may, just may understand why the referee has or hasn't given that decision.

I must spend 50% of games explaining to people why it was the correct or wrong decision, most of them accept they may have been wrong then calm down.

But, realistically until coaches/players and owners stop berating Ref's which in turn encourages the numbskulls to do it we will never have an end to it.

Ref's like players make mistakes, we don't ask the players to explain to the fans why they xhose to throw pass A or use a kick on tackle 4 etc.

What we need is people to accept sometimes Ref's decisions ARE right and sometimes they ARE wrong and that Rugby League is just a sport, it's enterntainment and if you feel the need to get so angry at a couple of blokes officiating this maybe you need to get professional help more than anything!!.

[David Dockhouse Host]

5 minutes ago, daz39 said:

How about we just give fans - heck even coaches and owners a basic rulebook every year with their season cards and tell them to read it before the season starts, just maybe some of the thicker ones who boo may, just may understand why the referee has or hasn't given that decision.

I must spend 50% of games explaining to people why it was the correct or wrong decision, most of them accept they may have been wrong then calm down.

But, realistically until coaches/players and owners stop berating Ref's which in turn encourages the numbskulls to do it we will never have an end to it.

Ref's like players make mistakes, we don't ask the players to explain to the fans why they xhose to throw pass A or use a kick on tackle 4 etc.

What we need is people to accept sometimes Ref's decisions ARE right and sometimes they ARE wrong and that Rugby League is just a sport, it's enterntainment and if you feel the need to get so angry at a couple of blokes officiating this maybe you need to get professional help more than anything!!.

Very well put.

I feel many fans feel it's their job to critique the officials, and they concentrate more on the ref than their own team. It's very odd.

I like you often explain decisions, those I don't understand or notice I assume the ref was correct, getting so angry as many do is just strange.

Enjoy the game, watch the players and accept refs like players make mistakes.

[daz39]

23 hours ago, Dave T said:

I think there are things that can be done better with regards this type of things for fans, and not because of any issues with refs in the slightest, but purely from a fan engagement point of view. 

I think the VR could be improved. The screen at Wire the other night was a waste of space from 100 metres away, maybe we could hear the VR's deliberations, or a brief explanation like in NFL. Conscious of slowing down the game though to Jughead's point. 

Sky have a weekly feature on football with an ex-ref, Dermot? where they discuss controversial decisions. I like this feature and I think it is an enhancement on what we did with Cummings. I think these clips could then be used in pre-match both at the ground and on Sky and can help to educate and explain. 

One final thing, and this is a huge bugbear of mine, referee signals appear to have become redundant, I don't know why. Referees basically use one signal now, which is to point their arm in the direction of the team who will get possession. But often it is difficult to know is it a scrum, a penalty, was the offence a forward pass, a knock on, offside? We used to have more clear and pronounced signals, for some reason these appear to have gone. 

I've said this numerous times Dave, these modern ref's just simply throw an arm out here and there, a knock-on used to be indicated by placing hands in front, palms up and extending back on forth, nowadays it's been replaced by the Ref holding his arms out wide, obstruction used to be signalled by the arms crossed in front of the body, these days it's merely a prancy wave kind of thing.

Maybe if we get back to proper signals it would help as sometimes it's hard to tell what penalties are for.

[daz39]

18 hours ago, DavidM said:

Do we need to hear the ref mic the entire 80 minutes ? One … moooove … release … two …. mooove … you’re offside Smithy …. Don’t mooove of the mark … three … kick … clear etc etc . I mean really ? Can we not just hear some pertinent snippets 

Yet the bit's we'd like to hear - talking to the captains/players is drowned put by the buffoons trying to guess what he's going to say or do or discussing an incident between them.

[daz39]

1 hour ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

What would they say?

I saw a knock on so blew the whistle?

They call what they see, if it's an error and it turns out it wasn't a knock on then they would still say that's what they saw.

Correct, having a decision proved incorrect AFTER he/she has called it doesn't change the fact that the decision was given on what was SEEN at the time. Ref's are humans and will more often than not admit to getting things wrong in hindsight, unfortunately the game isn't played in hindsight.

[Dave T]

21 minutes ago, daz39 said:

I've said this numerous times Dave, these modern ref's just simply throw an arm out here and there, a knock-on used to be indicated by placing hands in front, palms up and extending back on forth, nowadays it's been replaced by the Ref holding his arms out wide, obstruction used to be signalled by the arms crossed in front of the body, these days it's merely a prancy wave kind of thing.

Maybe if we get back to proper signals it would help as sometimes it's hard to tell what penalties are for.

I think we can link this back to the 2013 World Cup. I'm not sure whether something was done to try and ensure consistency by reducing signals, but I explicitly recall being at games and struggling to follow some things. In the stadium (it was at Workington the specific example I refer to), there was a knock-on in the ruck, and the ref just blew his whistle and put his arm out to the opposite team. It took around 40 seconds to understand what had happened - you didn't know whether it was a penalty, or what, there was no signal for the knock on, and then none for the scrum. 

It's made more complicated nowadays because of the almost random rules where some offences are scrums, some are taps, some can be started in different positions. The rules are more vague, and the hand signals match this change. 

[daz39]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think we can link this back to the 2013 World Cup. I'm not sure whether something was done to try and ensure consistency by reducing signals, but I explicitly recall being at games and struggling to follow some things. In the stadium (it was at Workington the specific example I refer to), there was a knock-on in the ruck, and the ref just blew his whistle and put his arm out to the opposite team. It took around 40 seconds to understand what had happened - you didn't know whether it was a penalty, or what, there was no signal for the knock on, and then none for the scrum. 

It's made more complicated nowadays because of the almost random rules where some offences are scrums, some are taps, some can be started in different positions. The rules are more vague, and the hand signals match this change. 

As i said, give everyone a basic rule book at the begining of the year

[DavidM]

And we’re very good at changing the rules , introducing new protocols , clamping down on some things while pretty much ignoring other things that really are penalty offences , and oh yes , playing virtually a different game in different competitions . ‘ Why isn’t that a penalty it was yesterday on the game I watched - ah I remember that was in SL ‘ . So we do make it easy  for people to follow ! For what it’s worth , for all the criticism and comment , nowadays with all of that coming from above and comment and ultra scrutiny from outside I wouldn’t wanna be a referee . I think so many things ( at top level certainly ) make their job way harder than it really should be 

[Yorks Tim]

1 hour ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

Very well put.

I feel many fans feel it's their job to critique the officials, and they concentrate more on the ref than their own team. It's very odd.

I like you often explain decisions, those I don't understand or notice I assume the ref was correct, getting so angry as many do is just strange.

Enjoy the game, watch the players and accept refs like players make mistakes.

I sometimes feel it is one of my roles as a fan to convince the ref he is being far too lenient with the oppostion's offsides and forward passes and far to strict with my team's.  Got to shout louder than their lot!

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, daz39 said:

As i said, give everyone a basic rule book at the begining of the year

First of all I've read the rule book it's turgid, largely indecipherable and mostly unhelpful.

That's probably why refs focus on interpretation and not giving too much away afterwards.

Secondly most posters fail to read a post on here without misinterpreting and getting heated and you want to give them a whole book to get upset about.

There is a huge gap between knowing the rules and accepting them as applied.

26 minutes ago, Yorks Tim said:

I sometimes feel it is one of my roles as a fan to convince the ref he is being far too lenient with the oppostion's offsides and forward passes and far to strict with my team's.  Got to shout louder than their lot!

Now that's more like it, knowing the rules and reading rule books is for nerds, nazis and ne'erdowells!

[Dunbar]

I am a broken record on this but I am passionate about it.

We give the ref's a hard enough time as it is... we just ignore many of the laws as they laid out... pretty much all the scrum laws, the requirement to play the ball with the foot, deliberate knock on to name a few.

Then we ask them to referee to 'interpretations' rather than laws.  And of course we demand they do this consistently, both each ref and across the league.

Now we are looking for them to explain these subjective interpretations to the fans expecting them all to agree to the decisions once explained.

It's a no from me.

[David Dockhouse Host]

1 hour ago, Yorks Tim said:

I sometimes feel it is one of my roles as a fan to convince the ref he is being far too lenient with the oppostion's offsides and forward passes and far to strict with my team's.  Got to shout louder than their lot!

Ha ha very true, but genuinely believing the ref is corrupt and shouting abuse is different than 3,000 people all shouting "forward"  at the same time