Referees.

Buer

Tim Robbins wrote: »

The fans don't know as much as they think. Maybe the ref had a word with the Lions in his pre-match and said he was going to be very strict about staying on your feet and then had to back it up. We don't know.

Gatland specifically held a meeting with him in the build up geared towards how he would officiate the breakdown. It's very difficult to gauge exactly how he will interpret it until the game actually begins but the Lions certainly would have known the things he was looking at.

Tox56

Tim Robbins wrote: »

The fans don't know as much as they think. Maybe the ref had a word with the Lions in his pre-match and said he was going to be very strict about staying on your feet and then had to back it up. We don't know.

Yes but you look at the BOD penalty, specifically the 2nd one early on. The 1st one was just about borderline enough to be understandable, I've seen the 2nd one several times and I cannot see for the life of me what is wrong with it. That's not a failure to play the referee

chupacabra

I miss Spreadbury

desertcircus

Have a lot of time for Owens, would like Poite a lot more if he could be bothered to learn how to referee a scrum. To be honest, though, he's just the most obvious of a lot of refs who aren't catching stuff at the scrum. We need some grizzled ex prop to decide to lose weight by becoming a ref...

Tim Robbins

Tox56 wrote: »

Yes but you look at the BOD penalty, specifically the 2nd one early on. The 1st one was just about borderline enough to be understandable, I've seen the 2nd one several times and I cannot see for the life of me what is wrong with it. That's not a failure to play the referee

Hey I was shouting at the TV myself. Especially when I had action replay
Sorry for cheap jibe. You have a point. Both of those penalties against O'Driscoll from NH ref would have been considered good turnovers.

Klunk_NZ

South African's in general produce the best referees. NZ have really good reffs but the ****ty ones seem to make it. I mean Glen Jackson has been our best for over 2 years and needs to be promoted ASAP

I like Poite.

rrpc

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

South African's in general produce the best referees. NZ have really good reffs but the ****ty ones seem to make it. I mean Glen Jackson has been our best for over 2 years and needs to be promoted ASAP

I like Poite.

Likewise. Poite has improved a lot over the last couple of years and got much more relaxed and affable and genuinely seems to enjoy his job. Even to the point of saying to players getting into a bit of aggro "We are enjoying this game, yes?".

Or to ROG: "We are not in Thomond Park Ronan"

Mostly, though he communicates well, gives warnings and doesn't go from zero to whistle like 'Silent Night' Barnes does.

.ak

rrpc wrote: »

Likewise. Poite has improved a lot over the last couple of years and got much more relaxed and affable and genuinely seems to enjoy his job. Even to the point of saying to players getting into a bit of aggro "We are enjoying this game, yes?".

Or to ROG: "We are not in Thomond Park Ronan"

Mostly, though he communicates well, gives warnings and doesn't go from zero to whistle like 'Silent Night' Barnes does.

To be honest, you've just hit on his weak points. Poite is notoriously bad for his communication. Especially with non-French speaking sides. The Best yellow card in the Welsh game is the most recent example. A yellow card for a 50/50 call just because he didn't know what to say to Best so he didn't say anything, and let him jackal the ball.

His communication is terrible, and it's simply from his grasp of the English language. On his day he can be a fantastic ref, keeps it simple and tends to punish the team going backwards a bit so it can make for exciting rugby. But his communication skills and his scrum ref'ing is terrible.

rrpc

.ak wrote: »

To be honest, you've just hit on his weak points. Poite is notoriously bad for his communication. Especially with non-French speaking sides. The Best yellow card in the Welsh game is the most recent example. A yellow card for a 50/50 call just because he didn't know what to say to Best so he didn't say anything, and let him jackal the ball.

His communication is terrible, and it's simply from his grasp of the English language. On his day he can be a fantastic ref, keeps it simple and tends to punish the team going backwards a bit so it can make for exciting rugby. But his communication skills and his scrum ref'ing is terrible.

I'd forgotten about that incident tbh, but that aside, at least he keeps up with the warnings and there's no real surprises when he blows the whistle (exceptions aside).

Scrum reffing is pretty woeful all round, not just with Poite. It's such a lottery these days, I'm almost always flummoxed when teams go for scrums in lieu of penalties as any perceived strength can be immediately negated by the ref's interpretation.

twinytwo

rrpc wrote: »

I'd forgotten about that incident tbh, but that aside, at least he keeps up with the warnings and there's no real surprises when he blows the whistle (exceptions aside).

Scrum reffing is pretty woeful all round, not just with Poite. It's such a lottery these days, I'm almost always flummoxed when teams go for scrums in lieu of penalties as any perceived strength can be immediately negated by the ref's interpretation.

To be fair to the refs, because they cant watch both sides of the scrum at once there is nearly always something funky going on, on the far side.

.ak

Never understood why the lines man can't always watch the blindside? Come in a bit closer if needs be, he can back pedal to the line once the ball comes out.

Al_Coholic

never liked Bryce Lawrence...used to hate him running alongside the kicker when taking penalties or conversions

Tim Robbins

.ak wrote: »

Never understood why the lines man can't always watch the blindside? Come in a bit closer if needs be, he can back pedal to the line once the ball comes out.

It is because it is subjective. Someone might be offside and might have no impact on the game. Or someone might be offside and having no impact on the game but the ref just warned them about it at the last downtime. So the idea is the ref should be consistent to both teams and that way it's up to the ref to call it.

.ak

Tim Robbins wrote: »

It is because it is subjective. Someone might be offside and might have no impact on the game. Or someone might be offside and having no impact on the game but the ref just warned them about it at the last downtime. So the idea is the ref should be consistent to both teams and that way it's up to the ref to call it.

But if the blindside ref comes up to the scrum, then the other lines man can be in charge of the 10m line... That's how it's currently done anyway isn't it? Just that the blindside ref must remain on the touch line?

Tim Robbins

.ak wrote: »

But if the blindside ref comes up to the scrum, then the other lines man can be in charge of the 10m line... That's how it's currently done anyway isn't it? Just that the blindside ref must remain on the touch line?

The TJ's or the assistant ref's will make hand signals to the ref if they think something is up - sometimes. It depends on how they want to work.

Or they say something like keep an eye out for number 6 breaking early he did it in the last few scrums.

They work as a team or are supposed to.

But the game is super technical and super fast so will make mistakes or differ in opinion on subjective matters.

padser

Stev_o wrote: »

Joubert is decent.

I'm sorry, I know it's unfair to judge someone so much on one game, and no one enjoys seeing the French hard done by more than me.....but.....

It was a World Cup final, there were about 5 blatent infringements right under his nose and he didn't have the balls to correctly give a penalty to France.

Garseys

Nigel Owens what a hero. My face lights up when I know he's refereeing a Home game.

What about Barnes???

Tim Robbins

Barnes is very good. Definitely an elite ref.

.ak

Can we please be careful of our posts regarding refs. I know this thread is to discuss ref's pro's and con's, but keep it at that. Abuse, at any level, will not be tolerated. Posts will be deleted and/or infracted.

Klunk_NZ

I am sorry if anything I said about Barnes has been incorrectly perceived as abuse...

Just, he is a poor ref in comparison to the high standard other international refs constantly reach.

Tim Robbins

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

Just, he is a poor ref in comparison to the high standard other international refs constantly reach.

Perhaps explain in technical details why you think that is so?

One reason why I think he has a higher penalty count is that he catches things other refs miss. I remember in the grand slam game versus Wales he pulled Heaslip for an illegal clear out at the lineout. He was spot on. I missed it he didn't.

I think that's a sign of a good ref. They spot something that has material effect the first time that most people miss. When I watch the game again, I really enjoy watching all their calls, their positioning and how they can get something important.

Also, he is a super communicator. In the heat of the moment, a ref can't be stuttering or slobbering words. He has to be able to communicate effectively - choosing the right words at the right time. It has to be short, snappy and terse. That's not easy.

I remember Bernard Jackman slammed into a ruck illegally and he just looked at him and went "that was gratuitous" and whipped out a yellow card.

There you go 3 words that communicate the message quickly and show he is in control - beat that for on the spot communication.

Showing you are in control is really important as the teams then know they can rely on the ref rather than taking the laws into their own hands.

Swiwi.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Perhaps explain in technical details why you think that is so?

One reason why I think he has a higher penalty count is that he catches things other refs miss. I remember in the grand slam game versus Wales he pulled Heaslip for an illegal clear out at the lineout. He was spot on. I missed it he didn't.

I think that's a sign of a good ref. They spot something that has material effect the first time that most people miss. When I watch the game again, I really enjoy watching all their calls, their positioning and how they can get something important.

Also, he is a super communicator. In the heat of the moment, a ref can't be stuttering or slobbering words. He has to be able to communicate effectively - choosing the right words at the right time. It has to be short, snappy and terse. That's not easy.

I remember Bernard Jackman slammed into a ruck illegally and he just looked at him and went "that was gratuitous" and whipped out a yellow card.

There you go 3 words that communicate the message quickly and show he is in control - beat that for on the spot communication.

Showing you are in control is really important as the teams then know they can rely on the ref rather than taking the laws into their own hands.

Barnes is much improved. I totally agree with McCaw that he was too green in 2007 for such a big match, but he's much improved. I have no problem with Barnes reffing these days. He's not my favourite, but he's generally OK.

P_1

I do find myself getting frustrated with French referees from time to time. Mainly I think that it's due to them having slightly different interpretations of the rules as opposed to Anglophone referees

almighty1

I always thought Chris White was a good referee and retired before his time is up. I'd place Owens, Joubert and Barnes way ahead of the rest of the pack.

Klunk_NZ

I rarely enjoy a game Barnes reffs,stop start, stop,start,stop stop. But he has improved since his early shocker every 2nd game days.\ and didnt let the woeful display of 2007 end his career unlike lawrence in 2011

irishbucsfan

Klunk_NZ wrote: »

I rarely enjoy a game Barnes reffs,stop start, stop,start,stop stop. But he has improved since his early shocker every 2nd game days.\ and didnt let the woeful display of 2007 end his career unlike lawrence in 2011

Yeah fair play to him.

And the man this weekend as well will be Joubert, who didn't let one of the most ridiculous refereeing performances on the highest of stages ruin his career in 2011. I suppose that takes a strong character.

I actually think Barnes seems like a decent guy as well.

Quin_Dub

Of the current refs out there...

I like Peter Fitzgibbon - Think he understands the game and let's it flow well. John Lacey isn't too bad either

Glen Jackson looks really good , the advantages of having played Rugby at a high level recently is very obvious in his reffing.

Owens is pretty good overall , but does have a tendency to be a bit of a homer (great when my team is at home, not so on the road)

Poite is awful at every level - Horrendous at the scrum , breakdown is a free-for-all (although all French refs seem to allow way more messing on the ground then others) and terrible communications - Doesn't speak to the players, doesn't let them know what's happening etc.

Barnes is technically probably the best ref , but he lacks feel for the game and whistles too many things up - In common with Chris White the previous English #1 ref, he's just too pedantic for me..

Jaco Payper is the best of he SH refs for me at present.. A tidy ref that doesn't get involved unnecessarily.

Joubert is the big name , but he's prone to shockers (hopefully Saturday will be one of his good games)


As for Pollock last week-end.... He was very poor , having said that the Lions should have been better prepared - SH refs will always penalise the "drag" at the breakdown (where you go past the ball ,on your feet but elbows/hands on the ground and then drag yourself back up bringing the ball with you) hence the 1st peno on BO'D.
However if you watch the game again at every breakdown when the Lions had won the ball (or even when it wasn't quite won) Pollock can be heard shouting "Use it, use it" - I don't think I ever heard him say that when Australia were in the same position. He also was extremely inconsistent in terms of advantage and at the scrum..


A final thing about refs.. they ALL need help at scrums , even the best of the above are guessing most of the time...

I'm a former prop and I have sat watching many many games with other front rows and we will all instantly identify who is the cause of the problem and very rarely disagree on our opinions..

Surely it can't be hard for them to arrange for a few video sessions with some former players ?

Sit the refs in a room for an afternoon with Paul Wallace, Keith Wood , Jason Leonard - those kind of guys and just watch a few 100 scrums and have the guys point out what's going on..

Tim Robbins

Quin_Dub wrote: »

A final thing about refs.. they ALL need help at scrums , even the best of the above are guessing most of the time...

I'm a former prop and I have sat watching many many games with other front rows and we will all instantly identify who is the cause of the problem and very rarely disagree on our opinions..

Surely it can't be hard for them to arrange for a few video sessions with some former players ?

Sit the refs in a room for an afternoon with Paul Wallace, Keith Wood , Jason Leonard - those kind of guys and just watch a few 100 scrums and have the guys point out what's going on..

How do you think Pollack did last Sat at scrum time?

Quin_Dub

Tim Robbins wrote: »

How do you think Pollack did last Sat at scrum time?

Not great.. missed the Australians taking soft contact which means that the Lions prop is destabilised and will likely hit the deck resulting in a penalty for collapse when in reality the cause was the Aussie prop holding back on the hit..

Also never once spoke to the Australian loose head about his binding - He was always binding on the top of the arm trying to twist downward , he didn't get anywhere with Jones as he is so strong and has such a low stance that it didn't really matter , but it impacted Cole when he came on as he scrummages much higher than Jones..

He wasn't noticeably better or worse then most refs to be fair in terms of the scrum.. It was his break-down interpretations and use or lack of use of advantage that I had most issues with...

Contrary to popular opinion , Props are not stupid.. Refs could manage the scrum without ever needing to use the whistle... A quick word before the next scrum or lineout to the offender is all it takes - "Keep your arm up at the next scrum" , "take the contact straight" etc.... If a prop hears that he instantly knows that the ref is switched on and the messing stops - If refs just do the typical guess work thing , Props will continue to mess and try to get one over on the other guy because they know they have a 50:50 chance of getting away with it...

OnTheCouch

The non-Anglophone countries get a raw deal IMHO, not because the referees deliberately rule against them, rather that with rugby being such a technical game, the communication between the captain of an Anglophone side and the referee compared to the same with a non-Anglophone captain is far far easier.

Simply because the conversation will need to be highly technical and precise, this is not a 'Hi, I'm John, what's your name. Where are you from? I'm 26 years old and you?' etc. This sort of dialogue (e.g. scrum problems) requires an extremely high competence in any given language to fully comprehend and be able to articulate what you want yourself.

Of course you have the same problems the other way round, where French referees for instance have difficulties expressing to Anglophones just what exactly they are looking for.

Mind you, save for making the rules a lot simpler, I can't see any way around this problem.