Munster vs Connacht, Fri 14th May 6pm; Eir Sport

Burkie1203 wrote: »

That open dialogue goes on all the time.

Assuming you knew this when the conversation started, and aren't just piggybacking off of Lost Ormond's comment - then please just lead with that next time instead of making a false equivalence in order to push the anti-Munster agenda. You'll save us all a lot of bother.

Lost Ormond wrote: »

Yet virtually nobody has ever came up with a proposal of how to improve the ref standards...

What would you propose? There are obviously some form of directives and guidelines in place to ensure that the refereeing of some aspects of the game is relatively consistent (see Head Contact Process, and other World Rugby guidelines viewable here https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/guidelines/15) - yet there remains many areas of the game where refereeing can be anywhere from "strict" to "lenient".

You seem fairly well placed to discuss refereeing standards, so would you say there's a lot done to align the thought process of refs with decisions regarding say the breakdown? Or the scrum? It seems like, from an outsider perspective, the only time there's any consistency in this regard is just after new interpretations/laws are introduced (the "pulling action" required for jackalling, for example). There needs to be some form of "one size fits all" approach which will make refereeing certain parts of the game a lot easier (obviously one size fits all isn't applicable everywhere, there is a certain level of subjectivity always).

Take scrummaging for example - it's an area some refs simply do not understand. I saw a comment online about Nick Berry in the SH saying how scrums are basically a free for all when he's refereeing. Surely there can be some video education to show refs what good and bad pictures are? TH boring in, LH swinging out, short binds, etc are all usually straight forward enough to spot and could, IMO anyways, be refereed to near perfect consistency if the education is done.

Same with the breakdown, it should be easy enough to show referees pictures which are good compared to pictures which are bad (hands/elbows beyond ball and onto the grass/shoulders below hips/taking off v landing).

Once this education is conducted, there needs to be accountability as well. Reflection, analysis, external review. I'm sure this does occur on a fairly regular basis, and it should lead to referees learning from their mistakes and becoming more consistent. However, it doesn't seem to happen - to the point where teams can analyse areas where referees are deficient and take more risks in those areas. That shouldn't in a perfect world, be able to happen.

Maybe re-affirmation and re-education on a consistent basis is required - none of this "forgetting to apply new interpretations after four weeks because eh" that tends to happen (crooked feeds a prime example, jackalling slowly returning to old norm of "surviving the clearout"). There needs to be constant communication of "this is a bad picture, penalise it"; ongoing all the time. Obviously, again, this is a perfect world situation, there's always going to be some element of subjectivity - and that's okay; but the inconsistency shouldn't be to the point where in an important 6N game, a referee doesn't know what a knock on is.

I realise that none of this is exactly revolutionary, and is probably already implemented. Which poses the question - why doesn't it work? Maybe it's implemented poorly, or maybe the buy in isn't there from the refs to improve their game. As the All Blacks say, "if you can't change the man, change the man". I wouldn't consider myself familiar enough with the systems in place to
definitively comment - maybe you would.

There are 21 Law headings in the rule book, of which about 15 aren't formalities such as equipment, the field of play, regulatory stuff. It shouldn't be hugely difficult to produce some form of alignment document and/or video(s) which shows the aforementioned "good and bad pictures" for these 15 areas of the game, and produce a decent level of consistency for the majority of decisions.

Would love your thoughts.

Yerra, it's a lovely day, I'll sun my broken leg and let the interlopers do their normal whataboutery .. peace

Jerry Attrick

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Yes because the narrative is always to micro analyse ref decisions that didn't go Munster's way.

But that's been the norm ever since Neil Back helped the dawdling Peter Stringer to feed a scrum in the Millennium Stadium way back in 2003!

theVersatile wrote: »

And in what way is that related to Shaka's proposal for an open dialogue between refs and squads for greater understanding of rules? Exactly, none. Stop changing the goalposts. We know you don't like Munster.

That open dialogue goes on all the time.

Stander's comments are accusing the ref on bias. There is none.

Shelflife

Theres nothing to stop any team from asking a referee to meet with them and go through any queries that they have and clarify any issues that they have.

aloooof

Ah lads.... Does anyone have that Grandpa Simpson meme handy??

Lost Ormond

Shaka Hislop wrote: »

There has to be a coming together of clubs and referee's to sit down and watch games together...to have clear and open dialogue between both sides and for input from players taken on-board..and for the reasons behind decisions to be acknowledged by players.
It'll benefit both sides immensely imo

Teams work with refs/ref manager all the time where its explained why certain decisions were made. Been happening for quite some time.

Cookiemunster wrote: »

The poor standard of refereeing in the Pro14 is well known about and discussed regularly across many threads. Yet when a Munster fan mentions it they're accused of only bringing up to as an excuse for the loss. Pathetic really from the usuals.

Yet vritually nobody has ever came up with a proposal of how to improve the ref standards...

[Deleted User]

Akrasia wrote: »

Wooten was anting the maggot too, he deliberately relayed touching the ball down until the last second

When JOD went for that ball lit was in play

More great examples in this thread of the fact a Munster player has never, ever committed an act of foul play.

"Acting the maggot" for not touching the ball down, how on earth did you come up with that garbage?

thomond2006

Great weather today. Some of ye should go enjoy it.

Burkie1203 wrote: »

the international player in question - his issue is he believes the ref is biased against his team with his "we are playing against more then 15" comment, they arent.

And in what way is that related to Shaka's proposal for an open dialogue between refs and squads for greater understanding of rules? Exactly, none. Stop changing the goalposts. We know you don't like Munster.

theVersatile wrote: »

This was the point raised by Shaka Hislop.

Where does "bias against Munster" come into it? All you're doing is trying to drag down the conversation and rope a few lads into an argument. Maybe address the point made instead of peddling nonsense?

the international player in question - his issue is he believes the ref is biased against his team with his "we are playing against more then 15" comment, they arent.

VayNiice

Akrasia wrote: »

If you watch it back Daly had his eyes on Casey while making the tackle and moved deliberately towards Casey after the tackle and tripped him while off his feet.

Get over it mate, there was a forward pass before that incident anyway and two connacht players ahead of him.

Burkie1203 wrote: »

but the narrative from Stander is the ref is biased.

This was the point raised by Shaka Hislop.

Shaka Hislop wrote: »

There has to be a coming together of clubs and referee's to sit down and watch games together...to have clear and open dialogue between both sides and for input from players taken on-board..and for the reasons behind decisions to be acknowledged by players.
It'll benefit both sides immensely imo

Where does "bias against Munster" come into it? All you're doing is trying to drag down the conversation and rope a few lads into an argument. Maybe address the point made instead of peddling nonsense?

Akrasia wrote: »

If you watch it back Daly had his eyes on Casey while making the tackle and moved deliberately towards Casey after the tackle and tripped him while off his feet.

thats the sort of dark arts we are told POM is great at.

Shaka Hislop wrote: »

It's not about micro analysis...it's about trying to raise standards.....and if an international player is thinking there is an issue, then you should probably listen, for a change

but the narrative from Stander is the ref is biased.

Neither did 23 penalties shared almost evenly but CJ Stander fumed at the performance of the referee Dan Jones afterwards when he told eir Sport that it had felt like “playing against more than 15 men”, adding “I can say it now I’m done but it’s difficult for both sides.”

Plenty of calls went Munsters way too.

Akrasia

theVersatile wrote: »

That's a very literal interpretation of the laws. It's also interesting now that you point it out considering Law 13.3 provides that

A player on the ground without the ball is out of the game and must:
a. Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of
the ball.
b. Not play the ball.
c. Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.

No mention of being near the tackle area. Interesting quirk.

That being said, I'm not quite sure Casey didn't just run into Daly and collide with him. If you look at it in real time it'd be very hard to conclude that Daly purposefully went to tackle Casey having just spun out of the previous tackle and been flung backwards.

If you watch it back Daly had his eyes on Casey while making the tackle and moved deliberately towards Casey after the tackle and tripped him while off his feet.

VayNiice

Casey is being made out to be the new saviour but I felt he was poor at times. Got bounced like a rag doll a couple of times, particularly with his attempted tackle on Arnold who is no man-mountain.

Also seemed slower getting the ball away, similar to Murray.

Shelflife

Shaka Hislop wrote: »

It's not about micro analysis...it's about trying to raise standards.....and if an international player is thinking there is an issue, then you should probably listen, for a change

You're making the very dangerous assumption that the International player knows the laws better than a professional referee.

Just because he doesn't like the decisions doesn't make them wrong !

Cookiemunster

The poor standard of refereeing in the Pro14 is well known about and discussed regularly across many threads. Yet when a Munster fan mentions it they're accused of only bringing up to as an excuse for the loss. Pathetic really from the usuals.

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Yes because the narrative is always to micro analyse ref decisions that didn't go Munster's way.

Even a senior Munster player is now pushing that narrative in the media.

It's not about micro analysis...it's about trying to raise standards.....and if an international player is thinking there is an issue, then you should probably listen, for a change

Shaka Hislop wrote: »

Yes, does that lessen the point in some way?

Yes because the narrative is always to micro analyse ref decisions that didn't go Munster's way.

Even a senior Munster player is now pushing that narrative in the media.

OldRio wrote: »

It makes my point

You didn't make a point, you just went for a glib shot....no bother about that but ....we have seen an overall deterioration of refereeing standards in the Pro 14...there has to be something done about it.

OldRio wrote: »

It makes my point

And what exactly is your point, Mr Cryptic?

OldRio

Shaka Hislop wrote: »

Yes, does that lessen the point in some way?

It makes my point

OldRio wrote: »

I take it Munster lost?

Yes, does that lessen the point in some way?

OldRio

Shaka Hislop wrote: »

There has to be a coming together of clubs and referee's to sit down and watch games together...to have clear and open dialogue between both sides and for input from players taken on-board..and for the reasons behind decisions to be acknowledged by players.
It'll benefit both sides immensely imo

I take it Munster lost?

There has to be a coming together of clubs and referee's to sit down and watch games together...to have clear and open dialogue between both sides and for input from players taken on-board..and for the reasons behind decisions to be acknowledged by players.
It'll benefit both sides immensely imo