What causes more harm?

[meast]

Again, something I picked up on social media over the last bizarre 48 hours was a question someone posed , basically asking what is the most damaging and dangerous thing regarding RL especially on social media at the moment.

Is it the constant nit-picking, questioning and scrutiny of refereeing decisions or referees over the weekend. or

Is it the constant nit-picking, questioning and scrutiny of the MRP and disciplinary.

It seems there is always something to court controversy, anger and angst but is the constant negativity damaging the game and it's image?

I just find it pathetic now that people can't, or won't accept that players make more mistakes and errors than anyone else in the game.

The MRP might not always get things right for fans of your clubs but surely we all want to see bad behaviour, poor sportsmanship and recklessness taken out of the sport?

[Saint Toppy]

Players & officials are bound to make mistakes given they're the ones making split second decisions in a live scenario. Players are held accountable by their coaches and the officials by the RFL. While people get frustrated by these mistakes I think most people will accept they're always going to happen.

The MRP on the other hand should not be making mistakes. They're not time limited in having to make instant decisions, they can spend hours scrutinising every incident and have multiple people review it. I think most people would agree that at the moment the MRP isn't operating as it should. There's huge inconsistency in gradings with almost every week clubs, coaches and fans unhappy with how incidents are dealt with (or not dealt with as the case may be).

The bulk of the challenges to charges appears to be around the actual gradings which (and please correct me if i'm wrong) is decided initially by the review panel made up of ex players like Cullen. Its their recommendations that then get sent to the main panel for the actual sentence to be decided (with that panel made up of legal professionals).

IMO its that initial review panel thats flawed at the moment and while those people may have an understanding of the game as ex players im not sure they have the skills to be making interpretations of the games laws

[sam4731]

Both. Let them do their job. No one should be questioning referees and the MRP should only be challenged by official appeals processes, not vilified by the media, fans, coaches etc, in the public eye.

[Saint Toppy]

1 hour ago, sam4731 said:

Both. Let them do their job. No one should be questioning referees and the MRP should only be challenged by official appeals processes, not vilified by the media, fans, coaches etc, in the public eye.

While I agree about the 'trial by media' part there are still some serious flaws that need addressing in the process. While there is an official process (and this is something Wellens has alluded to) in that the RFL appear to not be engaging with clubs when they raise concerns about the process. They just 'dig their heels in' and say, "we're right, your wrong, we'll maybe look at it after the season is over"

I know one thing that Wellens queried and asked for further clarifications over was the apparent inconsistency in gradings. One week a player can get hit late after passing the ball and there's a Grade B change and the next there's a late hit and just a caution or not even a charge of any sort.

[sam4731]

9 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

While I agree about the 'trial by media' part there are still some serious flaws that need addressing in the process. While there is an official process (and this is something Wellens has alluded to) in that the RFL appear to not be engaging with clubs when they raise concerns about the process. They just 'dig their heels in' and say, "we're right, your wrong, we'll maybe look at it after the season is over"

I know one thing that Wellens queried and asked for further clarifications over was the apparent inconsistency in gradings. One week a player can get hit late after passing the ball and there's a Grade B change and the next there's a late hit and just a caution or not even a charge of any sort.

Like I've said though, if we allow criticism of the MRP from coaches, then allow them the right of reply. Imagine Ganson coming out and criticising Wellens' coaching style.

[DemonUK]

43 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

Like I've said though, if we allow criticism of the MRP from coaches, then allow them the right of reply. Imagine Ganson coming out and criticising Wellens' coaching style.

What a great starter for a social media pile on  Incidentally have the RFL dealt with Wellens and Rowley yet despite summoning them 2 weeks ago.

[sam4731]

1 minute ago, DemonUK said:

What a great starter for a social media pile on  Incidentally have the RFL dealt with Wellens and Rowley yet despite summoning them 2 weeks ago.

Seriously though, can you imagine the uproar if a referee was a allowed a post match interview and said that he probably didn't have the best game but it was made all the harder by one of the head coaches terrible style of play.

[RigbyLuger]

"The ball went slightly forward, which you can see when you slow it down, but what about that defence on the right hand side for three other tries?"

[overtheborder]

6 hours ago, sam4731 said:

Both. Let them do their job. No one should be questioning referees and the MRP should only be challenged by official appeals processes, not vilified by the media, fans, coaches etc, in the public eye.

This - although to be fair you can't really stop fans having opinions, so you could argue criticising them on Twitter is the same as chatting down the pub, even though it's more visible. Although that being said, I think a lot would agree the line is drawn at directly messaging said player/official though.

[sam4731]

8 minutes ago, overtheborder said:

This - although to be fair you can't really stop fans having opinions, so you could argue criticising them on Twitter is the same as chatting down the pub, even though it's more visible. Although that being said, I think a lot would agree the line is drawn at directly messaging said player/official though.

And coming down harder on coaches that question decisions. It it no more the right of a coach to comment on the laws or the application of those laws, than it is for the referees to comment on coaching styles. We need to severely punish coached who question the decisions to show that it is not OK. If they're not happy with officiating, don't be a head coach.

[RigbyLuger]

32 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

And coming down harder on coaches that question decisions. It it no more the right of a coach to comment on the laws or the application of those laws, than it is for the referees to comment on coaching styles. We need to severely punish coached who question the decisions to show that it is not OK. If they're not happy with officiating, don't be a head coach.

Same goes for clubs who question officials during games on social media. Bradford consistently do this.

[LeeF]

10 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

Players & officials are bound to make mistakes given they're the ones making split second decisions in a live scenario. Players are held accountable by their coaches and the officials by the RFL. While people get frustrated by these mistakes I think most people will accept they're always going to happen.

The MRP on the other hand should not be making mistakes. They're not time limited in having to make instant decisions, they can spend hours scrutinising every incident and have multiple people review it. I think most people would agree that at the moment the MRP isn't operating as it should. There's huge inconsistency in gradings with almost every week clubs, coaches and fans unhappy with how incidents are dealt with (or not dealt with as the case may be).

The bulk of the challenges to charges appears to be around the actual gradings which (and please correct me if i'm wrong) is decided initially by the review panel made up of ex players like Cullen. Its their recommendations that then get sent to the main panel for the actual sentence to be decided (with that panel made up of legal professionals).

IMO its that initial review panel thats flawed at the moment and while those people may have an understanding of the game as ex players im not sure they have the skills to be making interpretations of the games laws

You are wrong.

Cullen heads the MRP. They review, usually 1 member per game, each match and look at/ for incidents the vast majority of which are “NFA”.

Any which are deemed worthy of action are graded using the current season’s Operational Rules . Copies are online. Grades are impacted by previous at the same grade/ for the same offence. Also any ban is impacted by previous. It’s all in the Operational Rules. Offences above a certain grading are referred to the Disciplinary Panel who are headed by an Independent High Court Judge.

The MRP are very good at their job and extremely consistent. They talk to each other on a very regular basis and have their own guidelines for gradings etc. They have an excellent understanding of the current game and significantly  better than most followers and especially those looking at incidents with a bias.

Due to the nature of RL no two incidents are exactly the same and together with any “previous” you do get a range of bans at all grades but if you bother to read the Operational Rules they are clearly being followed. 

 

[LeeF]

7 hours ago, DemonUK said:

What a great starter for a social media pile on  Incidentally have the RFL dealt with Wellens and Rowley yet despite summoning them 2 weeks ago.

They have commenced proceedings. The non pitch ones are subject to different rules/ guidelines/ timescales as per the Operational Rules

Edited August 30, 2023 by LeeF

[LeeF]

8 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

While I agree about the 'trial by media' part there are still some serious flaws that need addressing in the process. While there is an official process (and this is something Wellens has alluded to) in that the RFL appear to not be engaging with clubs when they raise concerns about the process. They just 'dig their heels in' and say, "we're right, your wrong, we'll maybe look at it after the season is over"

I know one thing that Wellens queried and asked for further clarifications over was the apparent inconsistency in gradings. One week a player can get hit late after passing the ball and there's a Grade B change and the next there's a late hit and just a caution or not even a charge of any sort.

You do know that all late hits are not the same and that just because Wellens was whinging doesn’t mean he was correct 

[redjonn]

The key is treating people with respect on the pitch and off.  That doesn't mean a coach should not be able to query an aspect of referring.  It should never be personal but surely if the sport is confident in itself, has robust procedures in place, treats all people with respect including administrators doing their best we should be able to handle and discuss application of rules.  e.g. the ruck/PTB in most games is a mess and why that needs addressing,  surely that is something a coach should be able to highlight in a press conference if appropriate.

In addition, If a clear error like a missed foot in touch or a ball does not go through the posts surely whilst acknowledging we are all human and hence are errors made never-the-less it would be odd if that was not in a press conference, especially as journalist would be asking.  It would surely demonstrate a weakness of the sport if it was not felt able to be discussed.

It is about showing respect and how the situation is discussed plus being supportive rather than a blanket ban or criticism.

Their is no excuse for anyone targeting an individual say on social media or other media or wherever, key their is the RFL, coaches, players and rugby community singling out that behaviour as unacceptable.

It would seem odd that in a Televised game and an obvious error was made by the officials it wasn't mentioned and subsequently a question to a coach. How that was dealt with by that coach would determine how well he handled it with respect to the split second decisions the ref/officials have to make and how that can be improved by some form of assistance or different approach, e.g. whether the NRL has a good solution that could be implemented here....

 

[Saint Toppy]

13 hours ago, LeeF said:

The MRP are very good at their job and extremely consistent. They talk to each other on a very regular basis and have their own guidelines for gradings etc. They have an excellent understanding of the current game and significantly  better than most followers and especially those looking at incidents with a bias.

 

It appears that a large number of clubs, coaches, commentators & fans would disagree.

But thanks for your opinion anyway Mrs Cullen 

[LeeF]

5 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

It appears that a large number of clubs, coaches, commentators & fans would disagree.

But thanks for your opinion anyway Mrs Cullen 

An even larger number would seem to agree especially those who don’t have a vested interest (selected quoting of my post is noted). Maybe it’s because they like you don’t understand how the process works or maybe it’s because they can’t be bothered finding out or if they do find out they aren’t opening to learning about it  

Anyway if that’s your best response I’ll let you get back to your day job of being a professional whinger Mr Wellens

[phiggins]

2 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

It appears that a large number of clubs, coaches, commentators & fans would disagree.

Generally when it negatively affects their club

[Henson Park Old Firm]

What causes more harm?

 

Me: "Being on this forum"

[RS]

I’m sure there are one or two journalists rethinking the impact of their behaviour on other individuals in the sport. Irresponsible and poorly put together articles can have significant impact on others. 

[RigbyLuger]

36 minutes ago, RS said:

I’m sure there are one or two journalists rethinking the impact of their behaviour on other individuals in the sport. Irresponsible and poorly put together articles can have significant impact on others. 

If there were repercussions they might.

[RS]

Fair point