FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Third umpire referral in rugby.

Third umpire referral in rugby.

Started by bluebok86 REPLIES701 VIEWS· 08 Sept 2014, 11:00
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
09 Sept 2014, 14:34
#41
09 Sept 2014, 14:34#41
I care about slowing down the game...and I am not alone. 

I watched a game in the French Top 14 where  they trialled a referral system...the First Half went on for so long, the crowd and the players were bored stiff.

And here we move on to injury issues.....stiffness anyone ? Hamstring injuries ? Achilles ruptures ? Good old dead legs and cramping ? Yep, all going to be more prevalent when the game has to stop and start repeatedly. How will the big bosses and...shock horror...the sponsors feel if their star players get injured and miss months of game time simply because someone thought it was a good idea to bring this stupid new rule into play ?? 
And I think the chance of players losing their temper is probably likely to increase too with perpetual stopping and starting. Testosterone levels don't like to be messed around like that. If you want to get on with things, you just want to get on and get playing. 
More Red/Yellow Cards and bannings ?? 
PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
09 Sept 2014, 14:52
#42
09 Sept 2014, 14:52#42
So wait, scrum resets taking 5 minutes out of the game. How is that different and not just as likely to cause injury due to stiffness? And remember, in that situation there is absolutely nothing happening and then suddenly the forwards whole body is called on to exert itself to the max. 
I think we can safely conclude that if said resets don't cause more injuries then a minute or two to refer a decision won't do much more.

We are not talking about limitless referrals. Just say one or two per half each. And really most decisions won't take yonks. We are talking about, at first, eliminating howlers.
Fact is that to some people, being confronted with a new idea is interpreted by the brain in a similar way to being threatened. Hence much digging in of heels ensues and people think of any reason they can to hang on to the old idea, no matter how poor it is.
Sorry Becs but i disagree. 
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
09 Sept 2014, 15:02
#43
09 Sept 2014, 15:02#43
One or two per half ? Oh for goodness sake. 
Is it April 1st at all ?  
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
09 Sept 2014, 15:14
#44
09 Sept 2014, 15:14#44
 One question for the simpleton cerudunce windpomp.What makes you so convinced that the Bissie incident was a human error? Is it just because you want to believe that. After video replays of the incident where it is totally clear the tackle was legitimate we are to believe a human error was committed.Man how naive can one get!!   
We are to believe the fact that the Boks get twice as many yellows when playing against the abs is just a coincidence and not bias. Never mind the ratio of other penalisable offences.OR Bob Dwyers stats that one year were abs got a yellow every 42 penalties, Oz every 7 and Boks every 6 is just because Oz and Boks dont know the rules.
NO IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT THE GAME IS CLEANED UP AND WHERE EVEN IF IT'S JUST AN APPALING ERROR IT CAN BE RECTIFIED.
Plum great comments. You need to know ou cerudunce windpomp  even defended bryce lawrence and blamed the Boks for their couple of points loss to OZ in the last world cup dispite all his blunders that favoured OZ - I kid you not. 
Their approach is to find where the Boks made some error during the match, IGNORE THE EFFECT OF REF BLUNDERS - and then blame the Boks for loosing the game. We had some halfwits arguing along these lines after the loss to OZ.Now when somebody suggest ways and means to improve the situation they find excuses not to move forward.
It defies logic but there you have it.
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
09 Sept 2014, 15:29
#45
09 Sept 2014, 15:29#45
 Read this:Ex Supersport

Top retired referee Jonathan Kaplan has slammed the decision by Irish referee George Clancy to award a yellow card to Bryan Habana in Saturday’s 24-23 Castle Lager Rugby Championship loss to Australia, saying “it was a poor decision”.

The decision, which swung the momentum of the game and forced the Boks to play the last 12 minutes without Habana on the field, took the score from 23-14 up to a one-point loss, and wasn’t the first poor decision that Clancy made on the day.

Another bizarre call – when Duane Vermeulen legitimately hit James Slipper – also cost three points as Clancy saw it differently to the rest of the rugby world as he penalised Vermeulen for a high tackle that clearly wasn’t.

Kaplan, who was the world’s most experienced referee, had harsh words of criticism for both Clancy and Pascal Gauzere, the Frenchman who refereed the earlier New Zealand win over Argentina and called their decisions like he saw it.

Speaking on his website Rate the Ref, Kaplan said “there were numerous decisions where the referee got it wrong.”

Unfortunately, the referee deemed the Duane Vermeulen huge hit on James Slipper illegal, when it wasn’t and it resulted in 3 points. He did not have a clear view on the hit but still found the penalty.

“It was an error as was his reasoning that the tackle slipped up. Over sanitizing the game will do nothing for the confidence of the players, and nothing for rugby as a spectator sport!”

Kaplan then turned to Habana’s tackle that proved so costly for the Boks in the end, calling the decision “Bizarre”

“Later on he penalised Habana for a dangerous tackle and was advised by the assistant referee to confer with the TMO to make sure. He did this and bizarrely still wanted to go to his pocket. (We are supposed to believe that this was human error?)

“That was a poor decision. It is wrong if match officials do not understand the sport at the highest level. None of the top 20 officials in the world should be giving a yellow card for that offense.

“And if you think I am wrong, then there should have been a whole slew of yellows not only in this match, but others in the championship too.

“Jean De Villiers tried to reason with the referee, but he had made his mind up. It is not good enough.

“I have great sympathy for referees who make mistakes on the hoof ( as the referee appeared to do when he penalised Aus 5m from the SA try line ), but not so when they do it from slow motion replays. Furthermore, the public will be baying for some sort of action to be taken against the referee as the perception is that they are getting short changed by this type of random decision making.

SA played much better than their last 2 tests but still came away empty handed. There were parts of their game which appeared to improve, including the set piece, but some of the errors, particularly kicking errors cost them dearly. Some of the inaccuracy by Steyn, Pienaar and le Roux cost them. Their scrum will be under more pressure against the All Blacks, and they will have to be very accurate for the full 80.”

Kaplan also had some harsh words for Pascal Gauzere on his performance in the All Black v Argentina game.

“Argentina came to NZ as rank underdogs but belied their status but really taking the game to the ABs. They harried and hustled the best team in the world and although behind on the scoreboard, proved that with time they are going to be competitive and win some.

“With the score delicately poised at 18-9 ( the home team were in control ), the Pumas charged down a kick and went on to score. The ref called the play back for a knock on. It was an error. But it was one which really was not a good look for the game as it appeared the referee didn’t understand the difference between a knock and a charge down, which I am sure is not true.

“Are we going to go along the tack that we all make mistakes?

Not I. In an age where the technology is available, the referee should have allowed the obvious score, and THEN checked to see if the knock only he saw actually occurred.

The fact that he blew his whistle and didn’t use common sense is not good enough. Argentina were denied and it had a profound effect on the contest. I don’t think the All Blacks would have been denied as I think they may have had too much class, but I’ve been wrong before.

The fact is that this type of thing should not be tolerated in professional sport. The technology is there. Use it!”

Take the advice of a top ref oaks and lets modernise. Some oaks are locked into the dim past!
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
09 Sept 2014, 16:39
#46
09 Sept 2014, 16:39#46
 TYou have a problem in rugby refereeing - you have the tin pot emporers who made up their petty minds beforehand and then buggers up badly.   They would decide when to call for video review and when not to.   They want to run the game according to their rules - not the laws of rugby.   
No system - last of all the present system will work with those monkeys - the only thing that will work is to hit their pockets hard every time they foul up.   The public will not know about that one and since scores will not be corrected - will remain in a state of agitation.   
I think that after the two umpires boioth buggered up on Saturday - it is probably that in both cases the whole or a t least a major part of their match fees will be withheld and bothw ill be excluded from reffing top matches for the enxt six months - while they are studing the laws and get reffing opportunities only on lower level.   
Action would have been take - but the public will not know what actually happened to the two referees - the only public sign of disapprovl willbe the enforced test refereeing holiday.  Over the next year we will see what is happening.        
PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
09 Sept 2014, 17:05
#47
09 Sept 2014, 17:05#47
 And I think the chance of players losing their temper is probably likely to increase too with perpetual stopping and starting. Testosterone levels don't like to be messed around like that. If you want to get on with things, you just want to get on and get playing. 
More Red/Yellow Cards and bannings ??

LOL did you just say it must be the 1st of April. Funny how they calm that shyte right down when there are injury stoppages, TMO, conversions & penalties etc etc. Clearly all rugby players are beserkers and once they go red we should simply let them fight to the death...or take'em out back and shoot em. Ummm...

Here are some more irrelevances based around not wanting referrals. 
*It's traditional to go the way we have been. IRRELEVANT*Sometimes you get a bad call and sometimes the other team does. IRRELEVANT*Refs are only human. IRRELEVANT*Yes but the team against which the bad call went performed badly anyway. IRRELEVANT*Where will it all end? IRRELEVANT*Refs are docked after the poor performance anyway. IRRELEVANT*What's done is done. IRRELEVANT*Anything Becs seems to say. IRRELEVANT
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
09 Sept 2014, 17:06
#48
09 Sept 2014, 17:06#48
 @Beeno.

"What makes you so convinced that the Bissie incident was a human error? Is it just because you want to believe that. After video replays of the incident where it is totally clear the tackle was legitimate we are to believe a human error was committed.Man how naive can one get!!"

Forget it. You are making the exact same mistake that the ref made on Saturday. You have already decided what I was trying to say and that' s it. Just like the ref decided that Duane made an illegal tackle and that's it.
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
09 Sept 2014, 17:14
#49
09 Sept 2014, 17:14#49
You forgot to add that you are irrelevant, Plum.  
PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
09 Sept 2014, 17:18
#50
09 Sept 2014, 17:18#50
 No Becs. I didn't. I left myself off the last after careful scrutiny of my relevance. Sorry you didn't make the cut.
BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
09 Sept 2014, 17:43
#51
09 Sept 2014, 17:43#51
Bec's and cera, I am not calling for an overhaul of the system, just two reviews when there has been a blatant mistake. It may add a couple of minutes to a game, but no more than a couple of scrum re-sets, as someone has already noted. 
I ask both of you to consider the following, imagine you were a professional rugby player, maybe two bites at the World cup cherry, and a handful of chances to win the Rugby Champs throughout your career. One bad call and it can all be for nothing, no second chance, no recourse, just an unjust loss and that is it! It must be heart breaking! One simple change to procedure and the doubt can be erased. It is one thing to lose a game because you were beaten by a better side, a hard pill to swallow, but players are used to that. But when the loss comes, not because of a better team winning, but because of an officiating error that could have been avoided, then it is just tragic. 
I am all for the traditional side of rugby, but not at the cost of fair play.    
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
09 Sept 2014, 17:51
#52
09 Sept 2014, 17:51#52
I have a Double First in Sport Psychology....and I have known many sportsmen and women in my time, still do.
I also have known many International Rugby players. I can tell you they get sick of interference and the game stopping every few minutes !!!! 
What does that tell you ?  
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
09 Sept 2014, 17:58
#53
09 Sept 2014, 17:58#53
Bluebok, consider this. You are a professional rugby player in your last ever RWC. You are playing in the QF of the RWC and you are leading 9-8. It is in the final minute of the game. There is a line-out in your won 22m. One of your team mates play the opposition player in the air. Penalty against your team. The kick is over. You loose the game and a spot in the SF. Earlier in the game, one of your team mates also knocked the ball on with an open goal line in front of him. Your team was the better team on the day and they have even over come atrocious calls by the ref to get their noses in front.
BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:02
#54
09 Sept 2014, 18:02#54
Rugby by its very nature stops every few minutes. Knock on, collapsed scrum, third umpire, ball kicked out to touch, injury stoppage, the chit chat between players after awarding a penalty while deciding to go for posts or line-out, conversion after a try, I think you get the picture. If they don't like it, they are in the wrong sport. 
BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:07
#55
09 Sept 2014, 18:07#55
Cera, you don't agree with getting the call right, and that is that. I can't make the logic any clearer, so I won't try. Check out soccer, it should be right down you alley. 
PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:11
#56
09 Sept 2014, 18:11#56
 Ceradyne...

Bluebok, consider this. You are a professional rugby player in your last ever RWC. You are playing in the QF of the RWC and you are leading 9-8. It is in the final minute of the game. There is a line-out in your won 22m. One of your team mates play the opposition player in the air. Penalty against your team. The kick is over. You loose the game and a spot in the SF. Earlier in the game, one of your team mates also knocked the ball on with an open goal line in front of him. Your team was the better team on the day and they have even over come atrocious calls by the ref to get their noses in front

None of this has anything to do with referrals. It's player error. Are you just not able to understand the difference and what difference means to fans? 

One is...you were beaten by the other team.
The other is...you were beaten by the other team and the ref.
Yet another is...you mere beaten solely by the ref.
Two of the above don't belong in sport.

Really we can't make it clearer for you than that.
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:20
#57
09 Sept 2014, 18:20#57
Ah, I see....Plum speaks for all fans, players and officials.
Now we know.

Thank goodness that is clear to us  

We have a Rugby Guru in our midst   How super ! 
PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:27
#58
09 Sept 2014, 18:27#58
 More irrelevance Becs?
HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:36
#59
09 Sept 2014, 18:36#59
 Redsy trying to make a point


BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:41
#60
09 Sept 2014, 18:41#60
 Plum ou cerudunce windpomp is an oak of limited understand and rugby acumen. You will exhaust your self expalining rugby 101.

He is however not without ability, chief of which has been meticulously archiving any post which he believes may be of use to him in proving some body wrong in the future. At least it is pretty harmless and he seldom makes any headway anyhow!! 
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:55
#61
09 Sept 2014, 18:55#61
 @Plum and @Bluebok.

I just do not see any reason for referrals to be introduced. You see a big advantage. I don't. That makes me stupid and you guys clever?

Having more and more measures in place for the odd balls-up eventually ends up with everything going over the top. What eventually happened to the scrums is a perfect example. Back in the day, when there was hardly any intervention by the refs, the scrums worked perfectly well. Yes, there were neck injuries but in those days the players were not nearly in the same state of physical conditioning as today. They started the latest protocol and it worked fine for quite some times until the coaches and/or players discovered new ways of fooling the refs and stuffing it up.

Like someone has rightfully mentioned, we do only really have about half a game alread, due to frequent stopages and BS but if you guys are happy with adding another 20 minutes per game, good luck.


PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
09 Sept 2014, 18:59
#62
09 Sept 2014, 18:59#62
 lol Beeno...well there has been very little in the few posts i have seen to suggest headway is possible. Still we gotta try
RE
redsmanPro1,710 posts
10 Sept 2014, 01:35
#63
10 Sept 2014, 01:35#63

Cloudy headed - you really are that cloudy headed its beyond a joke.


I know you are so blinded by your small country syndrome that you cant take your eye of Australia for one moment...


But please for the betterment of the game - contribute youre opinion on the real matter - not recriminations... instead on how to fix the problem if you are indeed capable of focussing on this rather than playing the anti-Australian sentiment...


I 100% agree Plum something NEEDs to happen - the balance of when and how its used IS important and..


 I hear what becs is saying that you don't want to slow down an alrady slow game... (this is already the main complaint from the winter sports overfed in Oz)


 BUT ref decisions always seem to favour the kiwis so I think there is more to this issue that meets the eye...


Lets see if we're not talking about how the bok were ripped by dud ref calls on Saturday evening... I say 99% chance that refs will favour the AIG again......................... and whats more predictable that every single one of us watching on tv will see it (including the TMO) but play will continue regardless..............

WA
WardadPro6,663 posts
10 Sept 2014, 01:47
#64
10 Sept 2014, 01:47#64
 Stop sucking plums redsnek [eerrrgghhh !!] ya wee gurly-boy.Cloudys got your number ,its you thats hung up on NZ must be all the pain our Mighty ABS inflicted upon the whiny wobs ...51 points ! ouchies !As Ceradyne? said they have all they need at their disposal they just dont seem to want to use it or else they dont seem to get when somethings contentious enough to warrant review.Horse-water-drinkies.....
WA
WardadPro6,663 posts
10 Sept 2014, 10:32
#65
10 Sept 2014, 10:32#65
 Its the 12 years of beatdown that has sent him over the edge Cloudy ,I for one think its hilarious ! Its just so over the top stupid lacking any sort of wit or sagacity in even the most minute amount [ smaller than the protons wee brother moron JW mentioned hehehe...} that you just cant take offence at something so ...childish .Like I said before he's like a kid who;s team got beat ,hands in pockets kicking the dirt muttering "stupid game anyway ,,,mumble mumble" Nukefree has his number al righty .
WA
WardadPro6,663 posts
10 Sept 2014, 10:33
#66
10 Sept 2014, 10:33#66
 Cloudy "Kak" oh noooo! yo u've gone native !
RE
redsmanPro1,710 posts
10 Sept 2014, 11:02
#67
10 Sept 2014, 11:02#67

lets see on Saturday night if the ref doesn't spoil another game and gift it AIG's way... 


I love it how the kiwi pack mentality shifts into gear... like a pack of rabid dogs - biggest irony most live in Oz....


oh well... play the man not the issue.. its what you kiwis excel at...

BL
bluebokPro3,977 posts
10 Sept 2014, 11:05
#68
10 Sept 2014, 11:05#68
This is certainly not an NZ only problem, it is just reffing in general. Some here will carry on about NZ or Aus or whoever always having the advantage, but I don't see it that way. We have had our fair share of "lucky" calls over the years. It is just something that needs to be addressed, and this is the best and least intrusive way that I can think of to do it. 
WA
WardadPro6,663 posts
10 Sept 2014, 11:12
#69
10 Sept 2014, 11:12#69
 Just cos no other Aussies want a bar of you eh rednek ?Just soo fecking eaten up with envy arent you little man ?12 more years ! 12 more years !
RE
redsmanPro1,710 posts
10 Sept 2014, 11:24
#70
10 Sept 2014, 11:24#70

whatever bud - ill pay for your ticket one way... no questions asked...



Envy of what...?


 your cricket... nah... your league... nah... kiwis' continuous manipulation of world rugby... yep... 

PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
10 Sept 2014, 11:38
#71
10 Sept 2014, 11:38#71
 Agreeing with Bluebok on this one. Strange as it sounds I often see penalties going the Springboks way and saying "WTF was that for???" Admittedly that mostly happens at scrums, but i think we can all agree that scrums are pure voodoo and the ref probably flips a mental coin to decide who it's going against most of the time.
But seriously, poor reffing really gets on one's titties and howlers make you feel like the entire week's anticipation of the game has been for nothing.
As for the ABs getting calls going there way more often than not. I guess that is true at home, not really sure of numbers and only going on memory. But then i feel the Boks also get lots of calls going our way at home. 
My guess, and it is a total guess, would be that refs are more susceptible to crowd pressure than they know or like to admit. Could this be the case?
Would be good to know, all patriotism left behind, what you guys think the main reasons for the above sort of trend are.
Either way, I stand by the argument that i'd happily spend an extra ten minutes in front of the tele if it meant howlers were removed.
Stop sucking plums redsnek [eerrrgghhh !!] 
LOL what does this mean Wardad? If it's what i think then please make sure all parties duly inform me that i may sit back and enjoy said experience to it's fullest
WA
WardadPro6,663 posts
10 Sept 2014, 13:30
#72
10 Sept 2014, 13:30#72
 Plum you are waaaaay laid back !Invariably people see the sins commited against their own teams first the opposition second if at all 'I think theres an actual name for this where your expectations are reinforced by what you want to see rather than what actually happened .Its why I no longer care what refs do I really dont , and all this collective angst and hate directed against refs and the IRB ,along with all the conspiracy garbage [ and no the SARU had nothing to do with "Suzie "] only makes things worse.Refs need better less opaque peer reviews done in total fearless honesty without worrying about negative repercussions.The technology is a lready there it just needs using properly.
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
10 Sept 2014, 13:49
#73
10 Sept 2014, 13:49#73
 I'm afraid this argument will go on indefinitely, Wardad. 
Some people just want to use more and more technology until they have none left to blame  

They forget that the interpretation of the technologies results still lies with the officials. So we are back to square one, aren't we ? 

And we have our 5 hour match to enjoy in the process  
TT
The_TruthClub Pro471 posts
10 Sept 2014, 13:51
#74
10 Sept 2014, 13:51#74
 There is provision in the laws of the game for human errors by players... There is no provision to nullify the effect of humans errors by referees, while the game is being played...

Use technology...

It's just plain stupid to say "human error" is "part of the game"... Then why watch rugby at all? Throw a dice and and record the result. It would have a similar outcome....
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
10 Sept 2014, 13:58
#75
10 Sept 2014, 13:58#75
Ah yes, But one can never fully override human error, now can they ? 
Shall we play the game with automatons ? Is that what you would like ?  


Technology is used and was used on Saturday. It was overruled. There you go. A symbiotic merging of human and technology, as would happen more and more with a referral system. They get it wrong in cricket all the time and it wastes time.

Just leave well alone. 

Stop tinkering and sort the officials out !!  
PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
10 Sept 2014, 14:03
#76
10 Sept 2014, 14:03#76
By Bec's reasoning there is no sense in using a measuring tape when building a cupboard because ultimately you may still measure the wrong piece of wood...since you are human. 
I've given up. Bec's does not understand that though humans will ultimately still have to make the call, there are ways of making it easier and reducing errors. In politics we call this checks and balances...i hear!
And yes Becs, adding reviews will add lets see:
Games now last around 90 minutes...and you say 5 hours...so 5 x 60 = 300minutes...less the 90 already used leaves 210 minutes which is 2 and half hours. 
So if take the amount of suggested reviews, let's say 1 each per half per team...which makes 4. 
210 minutes diveded by 4 reviews = 53 minutes per review. 
Wait i think i got it!!! Becs you and i have very different ideas of what a review is and how long it should take. Maybe this has been our problem all along.
Now that we have found the actual issue at hand, care to inform me what a review in your mind constitutes? Does it require hand written letters to the rugby hierarchy delivered on horseback and answered on a fortnightly basis?
BE
becsPro4,378 posts
10 Sept 2014, 14:49
#77
10 Sept 2014, 14:49#77
Yes, Plum, it does.
And it will take years for the Ref's to get their handwriting to a suitable standard of Calligraphy in the process , so the whole thing will never happen. 
I would give up on the idea if I were you. 
You're just flogging a dead horse.    
WA
WardadPro6,663 posts
10 Sept 2014, 15:06
#78
10 Sept 2014, 15:06#78
 A thought occurs Mr Plum, if I go to Suncorp and see a ruddy faced squeezer with a plum in his mouth I will have a fair idea who it is now wont we ?hehehehe...Rugby is one of the only football codes where possession is constantly being contested ,its this friction where errors occur most and only dumbing down will change it .All refs should have an overhead view of scrums though .
PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
10 Sept 2014, 15:17
#79
10 Sept 2014, 15:17#79
 Haha Wardad! I shall indeed cancel my order of Plum(b)s for the coming months so as to remain suitably hidden from inquiring eyes.
Agree about the overhead view of scrums, though it will mean he will have a profile and overhead view to watch. One eye on each or does the TMO do the overhead watching?
Actually tried to understand scrums some years back and realised it's not a task for mortals.
It seems there is a misconception generally that technology will over complicate the issue. Though i am sure the idea is actually to make it simpler, and that's an attainable goal.
WA
WardadPro6,663 posts
10 Sept 2014, 15:33
#80
10 Sept 2014, 15:33#80
 Theres lots of evil doings in the scr um that not even R2D2 could comprehend !
↓ LOAD MORE (page 3 of 3)

More from Rugby

More news