Refereeing of France - NZ final

This has been touched on in the match thread but I'd just like to ask how much people think that the IRB's desire for NZ to win influenced the refereeing of the final?

In the second-half there seemed to me (not a rules expert) that compared to other matches where the attacking team was involved in so many breakdown situations that the penalty count was inexplicably low.

Yes NZ were the best team over the tournament, but that doesn't give them an automatic right to claim the final and France earned a couple of kickable penalties in the second-half yesterday but didn't get them.

Fishooks12

It was most noticeable in the opening 20 minutes and the last 10

very obvious that Joubart didn't want to be the Wayne Barnes of 2011

andrewdcs

As said on Setanta (thanks to all for the links on other threads) it was non refereeing. Shameful.

Can't blame ABs, you play the ref you have in front of you, but when France did anything it was pinged, the ABs were seemingly invisible. The Kaino "incident" was just hilarious.



Joubert should be dragged over coals, pretty unlikely. Roll on the HEC. Never had ANY controversy there :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

damoz

Its a disgrace Joe......

The IRB got what they wanted.

Shane Fitz

what's this Kaino incident you speak of?

andrewdcs

Does anyone know how referees are appointed to games?

Seeing as what style the referee likes to see (old school ground work / Northern / Southern / super 15s styles) has a huge bearing on what game will be most likely to win, surely their appointment should be totally transparent.

andrewdcs

Shane Fitz wrote: »

what's this Kaino incident you speak of?

Loads of videos in the Match thread with commentary.

Monty Burnz

I looked at the Green & Gold site to see what they made of it - very little comment on the refereeing. I've seen nothing about it in the British press.

Either we're all wrong, or nobody else cares...

Junior

As Johne Murphy tweeted yesterday "It would be nice to hear the ref say roll away black"

irishbucsfan

I don't know if I accept there was any conspiracy at all. I just think Joubert had an absolute shocker. The French government should consider a lifetime ban.

Shane Fitz

andrewdcs wrote: »

Loads of videos in the Match thread with commentary.

yea, found it thanks, the steanta clip.. I watched the match on RTE, and cant believe they never brought that up, as Matt Williams said, at least 4 penalties in that one incident..

andrewdcs

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I looked at the Green & Gold site to see what they made of it - very little comment on the refereeing. I've seen nothing about it in the British press.

Either we're all wrong, or nobody else cares...

Dallaglio kept mentioning it, but ITV didn't go back to him. Guardian were on about it a good bit, but none so blind as them that will not see (Mr. Joubert!) so the game rolls onto its next crisis!

I dont think there is a conspiracy, in terms financial, more that the occassion got to the ref. A la referees going to Old Trafford, Anfield etc. being home town boys, on little moments are games won and lost, France lost out this time, in quite an obvious and crass way. I'm sure referees will have a "they were robbed" attitude towards them for a while.

andrewdcs

Shane Fitz wrote: »

yea, found it thanks, the steanta clip.. I watched the match on RTE, and cant believe they never brought that up, as Matt Williams said, at least 4 penalties in that one incident..

The fact that it was the most blatant knock on was as bad as everything else, the French scrum had recently crushed the ABs (no full penalty!).

It's not like (famously for NZers) a forward pass, where the game is ahead of a ref / linesman and benefit of doubt can go either way, he was staring straight at him with a look of "oh jesus don't make me make the call!!"

iroced

Shane Fitz wrote: »

what's this Kaino incident you speak of?

You have it all there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XBqetaCfgo

- EDIT - Ah I've been too slow to answer...
Anyway the Setanta analyses summarize perfectly what happened.
Then, I would not use the word "conspiration" but rather "politics". NZ winning at home is probably good for rugby business. And then not to f*** up completely the French they gave the IRB award to Dusautoir. Again politics. Sad...

Chucky the tree

The ref bottled it, but talk of some IRB conspiracy is so ridiculous.

jmayo

Looking at the Setanta analysis really does highlight how poor the cretins on the other channels are.
Fair dues to Williams and Francis.
From memory on RTE mr politics conor o'shea made a slight reference to referring not ever taking away from this and then went on to laud the All Blacks.

Why doesn't hook for once get his teeth into something decent.

Interesting little thing for the conspiracy theorists amongst us.
AFAIK the last time a ref officated at both semi final and final was in 1987.
That ref officated at both the All Blacks semi final win and the final.

Monty Burnz

It would have been absolutely fascinating if Rolland had got the game as he deserved to after demonstrating in the Semi how to apply the laws of the game without fear or favour.

andrewdcs

jmayo wrote: »

Looking at the Setanta analysis really does highlight how poor the cretins on the other channels are.
Fair dues to Williams and Francis.
From memory on RTE mr politics conor o'shea made a slight reference to referring not ever taking away from this and then went on to laud the All Blacks.

Why doesn't hook for once get his teeth into something decent.

Interesting little thing for the conspiracy theorists amongst us.
AFAIK the last time a ref officated at both semi final and final was in 1987.
That ref officated at both the All Blacks semi final win and the final.

Again, I don't blame the ABs team themselves, you play the Ref you have in front of you, but Joubert was / (and certainly now is) the ABs "favourite" ref. for the way he lets breakdowns develop.

I always liked Nigel Owens (no referee makes no mistakes, but he runs a good game) and other refs who have that "laid back" style, not the whistle happy Pearsons etc.

Referees are like conductors, they can't change the music that much, but have a huge impact on how its played.

Monty Burnz

andrewdcs wrote: »

Again, I don't blame the ABs team themselves, you play the Ref you have in front of you, but Joubert was / (and certainly now is) the ABs "favourite" ref. for the way he lets breakdowns develop.

I always liked Nigel Owens (no referee makes no mistakes, but he runs a good game) and other refs who have that "laid back" style, not the whistle happy Pearsons etc.

Referees are like conductors, they can't change the music that much, but have a huge impact on how its played.

This would make sense, only there are many examples of Joubert penalising France and not penalising NZ for the exact same behaviour. Not to mention his missing bizarre things that are not open to interpretation like two high tackles.

vetinari

Yeah, RTE and ITV had complete shockers in terms of punditry. You'd really have to question their professional integrity. I expect the party line from ITV but RTE at times try to bill themselves as "telling it the way it is". They really really let themselves down yesterday.

profitius

A few clear high tackles went unpunished too. Joubert was more concerned about the NZ public than he was about being fair. Hes a weak referee and thats probably why he was handpicked for this game.

He was watching one team.

Fishooks12

vetinari wrote: »

Yeah, RTE and ITV had complete shockers in terms of punditry. You'd really have to question their professional integrity. I expect the party line from ITV but RTE at times try to bill themselves as "telling it the way it is". They really really let themselves down yesterday.

Infairness to RTE they had a full debate on the Warburton high tackle and didn't resort to the scadalous ref bashing that ITV did

However, they dropped the ball with this and I have a feeling that it was in part due to not wanting to upset Popey

jmayo

andrewdcs wrote: »

Again, I don't blame the ABs team themselves, you play the Ref you have in front of you, but Joubert was / (and certainly now is) the ABs "favourite" ref. for the way he lets breakdowns develop.

I always liked Nigel Owens (no referee makes no mistakes, but he runs a good game) and other refs who have that "laid back" style, not the whistle happy Pearsons etc.

Referees are like conductors, they can't change the music that much, but have a huge impact on how its played.

Except mr owens had a bad display in the Argentina - NZ game.
There are even photos of him disregarding ABs lying on the wrong side of ruck and not penalising them.

I think as highlighted yesterday they can dictate the tempo and by giving one side unfair advantage at the breakdown they affectively screw the other team.

As for the haka I think everyone should just do as Campo used to do and basically ignore them.
It would be interesting how the IRB view that.

Monty Burnz

jmayo wrote: »

It would be interesting how the IRB view that.

They'd fine you.

jmayo

Monty Burnz wrote: »

They'd fine you.

I thought the rule was you could not encroach over half way line or even 10 metre line of your own side ?
I didn't know it also stated you had to bloody stand there and watch them do their girly dance.
Shure if Wille Anderson had not started this there might be no rule at all.

Monty Burnz

jmayo wrote: »

I thought the rule was you could not encroach over half way line or even 10 metre line of your own side ?
I didn't know it also stated you had to bloody stand there and watch them do their girly dance.
Shure if Wille Anderson had not started this there might be no rule at all.

It would be quite interesting to see what the IRB would do if a team just carried on doing stretches or drills and ignored it. They would probably introduce a rule that you had to pay close attention to the dancing and then do an MCQ that you had to pass before being allowed to start the game...

The ABs are a huge marketing tool for the IRB, and it's important for the game that they are successful - I feel that this clouds the IRB's views on all things relating to them.

Junior

Monty Burnz wrote: »

They'd fine you.

That's a Paddlin'



I like the idea of only allowing them to do it at home matches..

Monty Burnz

Monty Burnz wrote: »

The ABs are a huge marketing tool for the IRB, and it's important for the game that they are successful - I feel that this clouds the IRB's views on all things relating to them.

I think this sort of pressure subconsciously had an effect on the ref and his decision-making. Or at the very least as someone else said, he didn't wan to be the reason that the AB's didn't win.

The way things went with the final - really exciting game to watch but the whole thing seems a bit ruined for me because of the fact that one penalty kick would have won it for the French and they definitely should have had the opportunity of one or two.

If the Weepu had gotten the penalties and conversion then this wouldn't be an issue as the gap would be more.

Phonehead

NZ were holding on for life and lost all discipline in defence in the last 10 minutes, really the ref bottled it to such an extent that it just look like a big fix. It is so unfortunate that this happened, the ref bottled it and quiet clearly had made up his mind he was not going to penalise NZ as a score for France would have finished the game off. It's just really really unfortunate that events during those final 10 minutes saw some serious blatant penalties missed. Very sad day for Rugby and CJ really should be made an example of by the IRB but nothing will be done for such a dreadful display of officiating.

We may criticise soccer for many things but if an official in a WC final was as poor as CJ there would have been a FIFA announcement acknowledging that an investigation will be done.

davegrohl48

Good clip the Setanta clip.

I remember that Kieran Read was badly offside when he would position himself infield from where rucks were. At one stage he was looking around in a kind of "I can't believe I'm allowed stand here" way. He decided then to jog back onside. Then drift forward again. At least four or five strides to jog back onside.

Benny Cake

Brilliant analysis from Setanta... Its amazing they were allowed away with so much!

funky penguin

Good man Gerry.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1025/1224306445492.html

Phonehead

We weren't all losing the plot! the lack of media reaction had me thinking this place had turned us all into conspiracy therosists, sitting at home with tin foil hats.

Jawgap

Thornley's piece is a good sumamtion of the tournament and his conclusion that there ".....something fundamentally wrong with a sport where a referee’s interpretation counts for so much" is pretty much spot on.

As a ref not really fit to lace the boots of the top flight guys, I thought Joubert completely abdicated his responsibility (even duty) as the appointed official for the match.

Actually, perhaps "completely abdicated" is a bit strong - he seemed to be content to let the match roll on as long as players refrained from stamping, gouging, punching and kicking - the more obvious infringements, especially from NZ, weren't pinged. It reminded me of an U9s blitz match - everyone running around doing their own thing, while the ref makes sure they stay safe - all that was missing was the over-sized baggy bibs.

A few years ago Paddy O'Brien spoke of the need for changes to prevent refs deciding games through the last minute awarding of penalties - I'm not sure the IRB have sussed that refs not making decisions also lead to them deciding games.

Anyway congrats and fair play to NZ, you can only play the ref and the team in front of you and they took their opporutnity.

pickarooney

Jawgap wrote: »

Actually, perhaps "completely abdicated" is a bit strong - he seemed to be content to let the match roll on as long as players refrained from stamping, gouging, punching and kicking - the more obvious infringements, especially from NZ, weren't pinged. It reminded me of an U9s blitz match - everyone running around doing their own thing, while the ref makes sure they stay safe - all that was missing was the over-sized baggy bibs.

If he had done that, fair enough, it would be in keeping with the ethos of letting the game flow at all costs and both teams could have got away with an equal number of infringements. What rankles is that he actively punished France for even the most minor (often inexistant) infractions while wilfully ignoring the same by New Zealand.

Digifriendly

funky penguin wrote: »

Good man Gerry.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1025/1224306445492.html

Excellent piece of journalism. Reference made to Wayne Barnes and his 'one sided display in Ireland's Grand Slam match' in Cardiff. Maybe my memory is poor but was Wayne Barnes bias then and to which side?

Rookster

After viewing the analysis a few times I have come to the conclusion that the RWC should be scrapped as it is essentially corrupt. Before a ball was kicked it was decided by the IRB that NZ would win. Why go through with the charade of holding the games for a month and then end up with this disgraceful performance by the ref in the final. The ref for the NZ v Argentina game was also awful.

Jawgap

pickarooney wrote: »

If he had done that, fair enough, it would be in keeping with the ethos of letting the game flow at all costs and both teams could have got away with an equal number of infringements. What rankles is that he actively punished France for even the most minor (often inexistant) infractions while wilfully ignoring the same by New Zealand.

Actually, that's true - he wasn't equally crap to both sides:)

theblacksands

Rookster wrote: »

After viewing the analysis a few times I have come to the conclusion that the RWC should be scrapped as it is essentially corrupt. Before a ball was kicked it was decided by the IRB that NZ would win. Why go through with the charade of holding the games for a month and then end up with this disgraceful performance by the ref in the final. The ref for the NZ v Argentina game was also awful.

At least you have the refereeing conspiracy crutch to prop you up for the next 100 years of the All Blacks tearing Ireland a new @rse hole every test match.

Rookster

theblacksands wrote: »

At least you have the refereeing conspiracy crutch to prop you up for the next 100 years of the All Blacks tearing Ireland a new @rse hole every test match.

It is not a conspiracy. It is a fact. And it is not NZ's fault either.

theblacksands

Rookster wrote: »

It is not a conspiracy. It is a fact. And it is not NZ's fault either.

Joking rookster... penalty count was 7 to 10 in the kiwis favour but allot of 'die hard' NZ rugby fans feel uncomfortable with how we achieved the win over the french... it felt a little hollow to be honest. Yes you play to the referee, but the interpretation and policing of the break down by Joubart was flawed. There is a bigger issue here at play - refining and simplifying rules around the break down - at the moment it is a minefield and negative to flowing rugby, with far too much room for interpretation. Roll on next season go the AB's and Ireland.

OldRio

I knew something was off.
From the moment Joubert lined up with the AB's to perform the Haka, I thought 'this does't look good for France.';)

jmayo

Rookster wrote: »

After viewing the analysis a few times I have come to the conclusion that the RWC should be scrapped as it is essentially corrupt. Before a ball was kicked it was decided by the IRB that NZ would win. Why go through with the charade of holding the games for a month and then end up with this disgraceful performance by the ref in the final. The ref for the NZ v Argentina game was also awful.

That was nigel owens and some of his decisions were almost as bad as jouberts.

The RWC now does indeed look like the xfactor of rugby.
Ireland threw a bit of a spanner in the works by daring to beat Australia, that upset the applecart and meant something like a Wallaby/All Black final was not on the cards.

The big nations are given time between the games whereas the weaker nations have to play with less recovery time which with their weaker squads mean they are really screwed.
Sadly rugby is going the way of some other sports.

OldRio wrote: »

I knew something was off.
From the moment Joubert lined up with the AB's to perform the Haka, I thought 'this does't look good for France.';)

I just can't wait to see him ref a match in France.
He will be lucky if one of those cockerills will not be inserted where the sun don't shine.

Edit:
just found this and I can't believe it is not a pi**take.
Otherwise the sport is screwed.
Talk about myopic. :eek:
Oh and the idiot that wrote it is an ex international referee.
It must be tiddly winks I reckon.
BTW if he does get to ref the next two WC finals I would just go out now and bet on the All Blacks.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10761463

iroced

jmayo wrote: »

just found this and I can't believe it is not a pi**take.
Otherwise the sport is screwed.
Talk about myopic. :eek:
Oh and the idiot that wrote it is an ex international referee.
It must be tiddly winks I reckon.
BTW if he does get to ref the next two WC finals I would just go out now and bet on the All Blacks.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10761463

:eek:. Can't believe the guy's not joking!

BTW when he writes "For me, the best referees at this tournament were the fittest ones - the ones who got to every breakdown and stood over it, not refereeing from a distance" that sums it up. So if you're fit enough, no matter if you don't know the rules of rugby, you'll be in contention for refereeing the next WC final. Bravo

OldRio

just found this and I can't believe it is not a pi**take.
Otherwise the sport is screwed.
Talk about myopic. :eek:
Oh and the idiot that wrote it is an ex international referee.
It must be tiddly winks I reckon.
BTW if he does get to ref the next two WC finals I would just go out now and bet on the All Blacks.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10761463[/QUOTE]

It has to be a joke.
Irony.
No?

SuprSi

He's obviously very out of touch with the game if he thinks Joubert had a good game. Also, if you read the comments it seems we're not alone in thinking that Joubert seriously bottled it.

djiffou

Anyone who knows about rugby and watched that match knows that Joubert had an awful game.

Rookster

This performance by the ref will stop the spread of the game. How shouldd the second tier countries even try after seeing this. The refs will not allow certain nations to be beaten. France were clearly the better team and should have been given the chance to win it but were denied by a crooked ref. Bad for the game!

daveharnett

iroced wrote: »

You have it all there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XBqetaCfgo

I remember saying after 60 minutes (at 8-7), that he would not award another kickable penalty, and the last 10 would be a complete free-for-all. I've seen it from him before; he is terrified of being seen to decide the result of a game, to the point where his non-decisions can be decisive.


On the Setanta clip, I think that you can edit any game to make the ref look bad. There is a lot of subjectivity in the game, and 50-50 decisions can hinge on subtle factors that are lost in 3 second clips.

While a number of the incidents highlighted are pretty indefensible even in isolation, I would point out that the two offside 'penalties' were not identical. The NZ 'offense' had no effect at all on play, whereas Parra's offside caused Weepu to hesitate in pressing an advantage on the blind side. In other words, the offense had a material affect on play.

andrewdcs

theblacksands wrote: »

Joking rookster... penalty count was 7 to 10 in the kiwis favour but allot of 'die hard' NZ rugby fans feel uncomfortable with how we achieved the win over the french... it felt a little hollow to be honest. Yes you play to the referee, but the interpretation and policing of the break down by Joubart was flawed. There is a bigger issue here at play - refining and simplifying rules around the break down - at the moment it is a minefield and negative to flowing rugby, with far too much room for interpretation. Roll on next season go the AB's and Ireland.

I've been on about (oh, ok, moaning and whinging) this (on boards and off) breakdown malarky for ages.

I propose they enforce, strictly, the rules of the game, ONLY the tackler and tackled players may go off their feet.

All players joining MUST step over and bind, and drive to clear (i.e. push the other team off their feet clearing the ball for you. Thats "winning" a breakdown. Sealing off (which is 95% of all rucks now) should be pinged.

Tackled player should be allowed place the ball, to give team in possesion a small advantage, tackler should release and roll away, then if the defending team have a few players nearby, they can ruck over, unless pushed back by attacking players.

all how a ruck is described in the rules, none of the flop on the ground joke shop that the final was.

jmayo

daveharnett wrote: »

...
On the Setanta clip, I think that you can edit any game to make the ref look bad. There is a lot of subjectivity in the game, and 50-50 decisions can hinge on subtle factors that are lost in 3 second clips.

Ahh FFS.
What part of NZ are you from again ?
50-50 decisons ?
They were incidents which were cast iron penalties yet were not given.
You can fogive him for not spotting Harinordoquy getting barged when jumping or some such, but what about mccaw off his feet conveniently lying over onto wrong side, the high tackles, kaino off his feet playing the ball on the ground, front row popping up ?

daveharnett wrote: »

While a number of the incidents highlighted are pretty indefensible even in isolation, I would point out that the two offside 'penalties' were not identical. The NZ 'offense' had no effect at all on play, whereas Parra's offside caused Weepu to hesitate in pressing an advantage on the blind side. In other words, the offense had a material affect on play.

All the offenses that NZ got away with and all the offenses that France got pinged for had a material affect on play and where the cup could have gone.

Whenever someone now mentions about the ABs being World champs in 2011 I will immediately think of how craig joubert gifted them the match, not how they won it in a similar style like they played the rest of the tournament.

Some people in the IRB probably reckon that rugby needed the ABs to win, but they are too short sighted to see that by making sure they win in this sort of fashion it actually hurts rugby more.

joubert should never be in charge of a major match again, but if the IRB do that they will be admitting how bad this match really was and how the French were robbed.
I would love to know the opinions of the other two officials and if they were happy with what went on.
I don't expect much from owens after his own craven display in the quarter final, but I would be interested to know what Rowland thinks.

Any chance he might ever pen an autobiography ?