Confessions of a Rugby Referee

Referee's Training Inadequate?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 10 Sep 2012 09:33:00 +0000

Not sure what I think about this, whilst it our duty to provide a safe environment we are not there to diagnose or treat a medical condition. Since this match involved school boys the primary care should lie with coaches or teachers and I would question what the first-aid provision was before laying the blame with the referee.

Referee's training inadequate, rugby death inquest told - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk

Its still a good idea to have a look at this.

IRB Pocket SCAT2

More Fiddling

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 29 May 2012 11:29:00 +0000

Just when you thought it was safe to look at the law book once again, the IRB comes up with some new variations.

http://www.irblaws.com/2012/

Most are un-contentious, how the TMO is used is yet to be defined so we have to see on that one. The scrum engagement is tinkering around the edges, its been said before the problem at the top of the game is all about winning the hit and I not sure that addresses the issue.

Running in the Sunshine

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:08:00 +0000

I've reffed at the Rosslyn Park Schools 7s for several years and finally, this year, we've had some sevens weather, indeed its been more like Dubai than Roehampton. Its a great occasion, 20,000 students from home and abroad and the same could be said for the refs this year. The London Society brought across a number for development refs from Singapore, India and Hong Kong who were certainly surprised by the weather if not the quality of the food (burger and chips x 4 days is hardly the food of champions).

I am always amazed by the standards of some of the teams, especially as we get down to the play-offs and finals, many of these kids are already better than I ever was as a player. The event also proves to be a great social event for the refs, we rarely get to share the camaraderie that players enjoy as down in the lower orders we are usually travelling alone. Sharing down time between games for 4-5 days is a great opportunity for a joke or to get feed-back on your performance. There is always a good turn out of the usual characters to use up the allocation of beverage tokens at the end of the day.

Whilst the good weather was welcome, it took its toll with hard grounds increasing injuries to players though it appeared to be cuts and grazes rather than the broken bones and dislocations we saw last year. The warmth seemed to help with muscle ache too, I seemed to be as fresh at 4pm as I was at 11am. This may be on account of my improved fitness, I certainly found that trying an ice bath each night helped in my recovery.

I did suffer one misfortune, I only reffed one match on Wednesday after being knocked out 1 minute into my second game. A conversion was being kicked onto the field and I had signalled it was good and turned to write down the score when the ball hit me square on the back of the head. I found myself on the floor and mildly groggy the medics deemed me unfit to continue and I spent the rest of the day as a spectator. It was my first knock out on a rugby field and is a good example of why you should always keep your eyes on the ball!

What did I take away from the week, firstly my fitness is definitely improving, rarely did I feel I was struggling and also found myself being more efficient with my running lines as I read the game better and thought about where I needed to be. I found myself actively looking for an excuse not to blow and keeping it moving, those 50-50 forward passes where allowed to go in the interests of fast'n'flowing. I've received a few comments regarding poor use of advantage recently, I think this is a habit born of wanting to tidy up scrappy low level games. Now I'm getting better games there is less chance of the ball getting lost in scruffy rucks or foul play spilling over into a punch up. There are not many more games to develop this approach but I've started to adapt my style accordingly.

Finally quote of the week came from one of the 16yo academy refs, "I think I'm allergic to Deep Heat, its made my skin go red and hot!" Kids today!

Top rugby referees plead

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:26:00 +0000

Good to see some top refs getting interviewed in the press

we need to expand TV view so we can always see bigger picture - Telegraph

Gods Walk Amongst Us

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 11:29:00 +0000

One of the benefits of being a London Society ref is having Twickenham HQ on our patch and a couple of international referees in our midsts. Last night Wayne Barnes and Steve Walsh held a Q&A ahead of this weekend's international appointments. They have much in common, both having started refereeing at their teens and taking charge of their first international in their early twenties, as well as being subject to some one field controversy. The difference between the besuited ex-lawyer Barnes and the laid-back surfer-dude Walsh is also marked.

The early conversation focused on Barnes and the lack of red card for Bradley Davies, he made the valid point that he needed to trust his assistant and having watched the replay both Wayne and Pearson clearly admit it was a red card. Another senior referee told me that Pearson's reason for not recommending a red was that he claimed he was too close and could not be sure of the height from which Davies dropped the Irishman. Seems to be a bit of arse-covering if you ask me. Later Walsh did admit that he recognizes that he and other referees are happy to be less strict that the disciplinary committee, he sees a Red Card as something that is instinctive, if he doesn't have the gut feeling then he will Yellow Card and let the citing officer deal with it.

I have spoken before of Barnes' refereeing style and I think it is one that all top refs aspire to, only blowing up if he judges the offence to be material and his intervention really necessary. He said that players want to run about, coaches want their players to run about and spectators want to watch rugby. I have found that trying to implement this strategy has improved my game. Both referees agreed that knowing when not to whistle is what makes a good referee. Given this I find it strange that one of my Twitter followers thinks Wayne is faster to his whistle than any other referee, Barnes' view of being a ref is that its not his ambition to be popular or well know, at least he's half way there!

There was a poignant discussion of Steve much publicised fall from grace and now, his redemption. He described that much of his life he has been angry and used rage to compete, this has seen him get into trouble as a consequence. Whilst the booze wasn't the cause of this, he admitted it made it more difficult to control his demons. He is now tee-total and attends Alcoholics Anonymous, he has learned to let go of his rage and is more at peace with the world. He was very frank and open and some even suggested a post rugby career in life coaching rather than opening a supermarket would be an option.

Both Barnes and Walsh gave some good development tips particularly finding someone you are comfortable to confide in and trust yourself; what has taken you to your currently level will take you further. Don't change your style as you progress. Barnes admitted that he does watch video of teams he is due to ref and speak to players to get rid of penalties before they happen. They agreed it was important to have key conversations read in your head, speaking to players about problems and dealing with discipline are things that need to be rehearsed

Finally the inevitable scrum question, why is it such a mess at the top of the game? Both agreed that it is the desire to win the hit but the punitive (and random?-ed) response of referees has been changing behaviour and that teams are now prepared to loose the hit rather than concede a penalty. Steve reminded us that the iRB is coming to the end of a two year review of scrummaging, he said there is a really worry that the hit will be removed completely, in the face of this coaches are keen to be seen to be complainant rather than loose what is a vital part of the game. That said, it could be argued that the hit is something that the iRB managed to manufacture in the first place.

I am sure Mr Walsh will listen to me about who should win tomorrow's game rather than all that English pleading, he did admit that there would be a big focus on tackler assist releasing.

Golden Era

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:11:00 +0000

During the Six Nations BBC Wales gets very excited, blowing buckets of cash on entertaining trailers but also documentaries about rugby and players. This year they have an excellent series recalling classic Welsh games, I have just watched two games from the Golden Era, England v Wales 1976 and Ireland v Wales 1978.

I must have watches clips of these games many times before, but never from the perspective of a referee. I am sure we would all see a big difference compared to the modern game but it struck me that the referee played a much reduced part of the game.

Scrums

As soon as the knock on was given, the players formed the scrum and jostled until the ball was in then drove, often the scrum-half was casually walking around with the ball before throwing it in. Ball not straight and foot up seemed to be the only thing the referee was worried about. Slipping binding, front row standing up and arm binding and turning in were completely ignored. More staggering was during the England game, the were two scrums on the England 5m line were Wales whipped the scrum around and scored from the resulting confusion.

Rucks

Practically every forward from both sides is involved in each ruck, there is no policing of players staying on their feet and we all know what happened to players lying on the wrong side. Players handling the ball on the floor and holding the ball to slow down release seemed to happen in front of the referee with impunity.

Mauls

Again, every maul seemed to attract every forward, there did seem to be a very loose interpretation of coming in from the side and obstruction (truck and trailer) wasn't policed. Mauls where dynamic and the ball appeared very quickly, perhaps because the lack of penalties in this area of the game, teams were less interested in grinding out a penalty and would use the ball to run with.

Open play

There seemed to be a lot more space, because the forwards are tied up in the rucks and mauls (also tackling was a good deal more optional), there also seemed to be no sanction for blocking runners.

There is no question that the rugby was exciting, hard fought and ultimately entertaining but it does open the debate as to whether all the changes in Laws of the Game have been for the best? More penalties from referees to stop player cheating perhaps have teams forcing the penalty rather than playing positive rugby. If the scrum is such a cauldron of conflict where its so difficult to know the truth, ignoring it as they seemed to do in the 70s meant players got on with competing for the ball rather than screwing penalties out of the opposition. How we square that with safety is another matter.

Watch the game here and look out for the Wales v France classic game, my guess would be Paris 1975 and Graham Price length of the field try.

England v Wales 1976

Myths of Rugby

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 08:25:00 +0000

A piece I have been minded to write for sometime but Robert Burns has beaten me to it

Planet Rugby | Rugby Union News | The good, the bad and the referee

Rugby Bars

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:16:00 +0000

No home club house today, instead it's down to a local pub for refreshments. Some loitering got me an excellent pint ofSpitfire.

Scrum Debate

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 14:52:00 +0000

Is it time for a shake-up in scrum laws? | Scrum Five

Lets get this straight. This is only a problem at the top of the game. Down the leagues most props scrummage, scrummage illegally and refs will have a stab at what is going on. If the ref is unsure, as long as its safe he will guess or let them get on with it.

At the top of the game it is not about a contest for possession but a contest for the quality of possession. If a prop has lost the hit and feels he can not dictate the quality of his own or opposition possession then he will drop it in some way. There is very good chance he will get another go because the ref is on the wrong side to see what he has done.

It has nothing to do with the surface, again look at the lower leagues, it has something to do with the shirts but it has much more to do with props cheating and preparing tactics based on analysis of the ref and the opposition.

There will be a change before the next RWC, the call of pause will be going but the length of the pause should still be varied, especially if there is a problem.

I am coming around to Brian Moore's view that managing the crooked feed and early engagement and the rest looks after itself. There is a good case for the "ball in" call being ref lead rather than the engagement as all problems stem from dictating the hit.

Bang to the Head

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:33:00 +0000

I am not surprised, a bit of tape to stop your ears getting roughed up, that is all you need

Headgear won't protect players from concussion | Stuff.co.nz

Brian Moore's advice on Managing the Scrum

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:23:00 +0000

This article needs to get more exposure .

The Rugby Referees' Forum - Scrum

The Laws, they are a changing?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 10:25:00 +0000

Just when you thought it was safe to look at the Law Book

Points experiment in Varsity Cup - SuperSport - Rugby

Mind Games

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 09:14:00 +0000

Its not just sportsmen that are using sports psychologists, last night the Society had a presentation by Dr Raj Persaud on the psychology of officiating. It was an entraining and informative meeting but sadly Dr Raj didn't know enough about rugby to make it truly relevant to his audience.

The most interesting to thing to come out of it was the concept that motivation drives perception, what we see will differ from others because our motivations are different. He illustrated this with a experiment with basketball players and a gorilla. By setting a skewed pre-condition he was able to demonstrate that many of us would miss the gorilla.

He was able to show us that we do see a different game to players, coaches and spectators because are motivation is to create a fair and safe game, whilst the other stakeholders are looking for something different, a win at all costs. When a player asks me' "did you see that ref?", I know that I didn't see the gorilla. Clearly, as referees, we need to keep as broad a focus as possible but we will never see the game in the same way players.

There were some other pointers to help us, the most important be the power of positive focus, when you need to do something well, concentrate on why it will go well rather than worrying what can go wrong. When you make a decision that may have been wrong don't dwell on it, reset the counter, focus on getting the next and every other decision right, each one is a independent event.

LSRFUR video

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 09:09:00 +0000

A behind the scenes look on match day..

Exclusive - Martin Johnston's Resignation Letter!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 11:15:00 +0000

I wonder..

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:53:00 +0000

..this story had any baring on the decision made in this one

Things that go Bump in the Afternoon

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:26:00 +0000

Rugby is a rough game and long may it stay so, but last Saturday I ended up abandoning my first game.

I took charge of what should have been a hotly contested Surrey merit match. The game had been played at a moderate pace and with a good spirit, in dry and unseasonably warm condition, cloud cover was think and consequently the light was poor. The Home side had raced to a 34-12 lead by the start of the second half, when the Visitors won good ball from a penalty line out on the home 22. They moved the ball to the middle of the field and the centre took the ball at pace on the 22m line, he was tackled by his opposite number and dropped very quickly. The tackle was hard and there was quite a collision but it looked fair.

It was clear, post-tackle, that the Blue player wasn’t coming around never mind getting up. I immediately stopped play and two Blue members ran on to the field to help their team mate, the one who took charge I later learned was a fire fighter and looked to know how to care for the injured player. The fire fighter removed the player’s gum-shield and there looked to be a great deal of blood in the mouth/nose area and the player was choking as a consequence. An ambulance was quickly called and after 3-5 minutes the player look to be regaining consciousness. The ambulance arrived around 10-15 minutes later and eventually the player was judged fit enough to walk into the ambulance and was taken to hospital.

A number of the Visitors and spectators were agitated after the tackle as they felt the tackler hadn’t used his arms, I don’t have a clear recollection on whether his arms were correctly deployed but my first instinct was that it was a hard but fair tackle. The tackler sustained a nasty blow to the head but walked away. I suspect that heads clashed before the arms where fully raised.

The light was fading and within the hour it would be too dark to play safely. I spoke to the captains about continuing the game on the adjacent pitch before the ambulance arrived, around 15 minutes after I stopped the game. Both captains agreed that whilst this was possible the concern for the injured player and bad-tempered fallout from the circumstances of the injury meant that the game should be abandoned.

I haven't heard if there was any on-going problems, hopefully the injury isn't as life changing as this one. I am sure that the happy outcome of the day's events was in good part due to the prompt action by the para-medic fireman. It does worry me how many games, even in the leagues, that have absolutely no medical coverage, maybe the RFU should spending more time addressing this than Mike Tindall's nocturnal adventures.

Error Tolerance, Zero

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:09:00 +0000

I'm getting back in to swing of things following ankle problems, man flu and Irish weddings. This week saw a last minute appointment to a medical student match verses the 1st team of the team I reffed last week. I can't be sure of the level but the appointments manager suggested it was a little higher than appropriate but the promise of an assessor would fix that. My comeback almost ended in the first half as my thigh took the full force of legs swinging through the tackle. I dropped like a stone but the expert medical attention concluded it was a dead leg and I was able to run it off. It must have been serious, I wasn't able to think to blow my whistle to stop things!

Doing first teams helps with simple things, everyone is playing in position, the bench is full and they know the replacement regulations. My pre-match assessment suggested that the visitors would be bossing things, with a much bigger pack, however the medics started very strongly, driving two line-outs +10m to score twice in the opening 15mins. The were getting some fast ball and moving it wide quickly only for some very obvious forward passes to ruin things. As the first half progressed, the medics lost a lock and a big centre and started to loose moment as possession dwindled. They turned around 12-7 to the good but two tries early in the second half saw the visitors take control, their scrum was now dominant and the medics were struggling with first phase possession. The home side's centre managed to catch a couple of interceptions but not with enough space to do anything with them, typically getting isolated. The medics took another try to bring them in touching distance with 10mins to go but a penalty and then a try sealed it for the visitors.

There had been some minor niggle and I had penalised the visitors captain when he took umbridge at a perfectly good gang tackle. At the final whistle there was 6-8 man punch up as things boiled over, I was 30m from the action with the ball, so I didn't get a good view of who was responsible. There was a least one split lip and it looked spirited.

My report cards were pretty good but both marked me down on one feature. The home side thought I handled mauls badly, why I asked. It amounted to one incident. Black is caught with the ball and maul forms around him, black are driving forward with some gusto, but there is a yellow player, literally suspended in the middle trying to rip the ball and/or pull down the maul. The ball wasn't going to appear, black are clearly going forward but we are not going to see the ball soon. Lets get restarted with a scrum to black, seems a fair and equitable thing to me, but on that one piece of evidence I'm poor at managing mauls. They seemed happy when I allowed them to rolling two 10m to score.

The other side criticised my control of open play, why? I missed a knock on, 20m further on I saw a knock on but this was against them. Sorry, but if your prop wasn't so slow and fat he might have got out of the way and not obscured my view.

Despite my less-than-obvious failings I am happy with the how the game ran, its always disappointing if there is a punch up and with less well brought lads than the medics it would have boiled over earlier. However, if a team goes out looking for it trouble will eventually arrive and its up to me to deal with it when it does.

Rugby Club Bars

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:06:00 +0000

My host's home ground having been swindled away by Chelsea (apparently) are tenants at this larger league club. Grotty changing rooms but a modern, welcoming bar, an OK pint of London Pride and an excellent lasagne.

Rugby Club Bars

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:00:00 +0000

The best facilities on the circuit, the students even bought me not one but two pints of TEA. Sadly the real ale selection has dropped from six beers to only three

More on that Tackle

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 10:23:00 +0000

Much will continue to be said about Warburton red but you have to split the argument in to two parts.

a) Referee were instructed to red card tackles were the players legs are lifted above the horizontal and the player driven or dropped to the ground so that the head/shoulders make contact first.

b) Do players/coaches/spectators/referees things this is acceptable behaviour on the field and what should the sanction be?

Analysis

a) The Warburton tackle ticked all the boxes for that to be a red in the eyes of the referee. The way a referee will judge at a tip tackle is start with a red and work back. Dropping because he realised it was a tip is not a defence. Making some effort to control the player coming to ground is, and that is what Stephen Jones looks to do. Players cannot always control the outcome of where a players body goes in a tackle, but they must try to tackle in a manner which is safe and when it goes wrong control the tackled player to minimise injury.

The video images of Stephen Jones tackle are pretty poor, the referee is just about right given he is judging it in real time without slo-mo replays.

b) A bit of rough and tumble is all very good until someone gets turn, its a valid for grown ups as it was in the school yard. The referee is ultimately responsible for player safety and there must be a suitable sanction to dissuade players from dangerous play. The negative consequences of this are there for us all to see in that semi-final. If you are going to take away red cards for this then what else and how are you going to protect referees that are not able to punish it adequately? Saying that dumps are different to spears brings in more subjectivity that opens up the ref to further criticism. The focus, presently, is what is dangerous? Landing on your head/neck from a height is. How do we discourage it? Red card.

For anyone who thinks it isn't dangerous, please read this.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/641866

How to avoid a tip tackle

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:40:00 +0000

The momentum of going into a tackle can result into a players legs going somewhere you don't expect them, this can become a 'tip tackle'. Wales' Sam Warbuton fell foul of this in the most talked about tackle at the weekend. Here we see Gavin Henson tackling Tait, the England player's legs are lifted and if Henson drives through or drops him he would be red card today. Henson has the strength to control the player and bring him to ground safely. Humiliating Matt Tait in the process.

Another example of Mr Rolland's judgement on tip tackling, more of a 'traditional' spear tackle but the man is consistent.

The question must be how many of this delightful compilation you would not red card?

That tackle and the Red Card

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 11:27:00 +0000

As a referee, London Welsh wasn’t a happy place to be last Saturday, well most Saturdays actually. There can be no better place to watch a Wales international short of the the Millennium Stadium itself but as I saw the circumstances of the Warburton tackle I realised I would be justifying the action the referee for the rest of the day. My conversation with the Welsh RFU panel touch judge for the home game was the one exception.

My first instinct on seeing the replay was “oh dear, he is going to get cited and banned for the Final”, a yellow card was inevitable. It was a surprise that Rolland issued the red, not from the action of Warburton but on what referees typically do under such circumstances. A yellow and a retrospective ban is the form and is something we have seen 3-4 times in the RWC, but I’ve seen an Aussie red carded in 3N match for the same thing. The argument of consistency has been made and is a valid one but needs to be applied to the action of the other referees in the tournament. The resultant bans for player show that red cards should have issued at the time.

The IRB in their infinite wisdom has decided that the ‘tip tackle’ is supremely dangerous. It is covered by this;

Law 10.4(j) reads: Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player’s feet are still off the ground such that the player’s head and/or upper body come into contact with the ground is dangerous play

The upshot is that if you take the player up, you bring him down safely; you do not drive him down (the extreme Melamu/O’Driscoll example), you do not think, “bugger I’ve tipped him I better let go of him now” (as Warbuton did) but you control how you bring him down (as Henson did to Matt Tait in 2005). Intent does not come into it, terrible things happen by accident and we must take the consequences.

What differentiates the referee’s actions on Saturday was he didn’t bottle the decision, he saw what he saw and knew how the IRB had directed him to act and he went to his pocket. The only mistake he made was not consulting his assistant referees, I doubt the outcome would be different but it would have bought himself time to make it clear in his mind and shared the responsibility for call.

Imagine a conversation like this.

REF, “this is what I saw, red 7 lifts blue of the ground and through the horizontal and drops him, he fails to bring him to ground in a safe manner, a dangerous tackle. Do you have anything to add?”

AR1 “nothing to add, it was a dangerous tackle,”

REF, “I am going to award a penalty and issue a red card to red 7”

AR1 “agreed”

The whole world knows what the Ref is thinking, the Ref has a few extra seconds to think about the consequences of what he is doing and he gets the moral support from the touch line. If the AR disagrees him, he will not contradict the Ref, there are code words used, if he thinks otherwise then he could have replied, “ nothing to add, it was a reckless tackle.” Reckless verses dangerous tackle communicated a suggested downgrade to yellow but the referee still has the option to keep it red.

The first responsibility of the referee in any game is the safety of the player and with high momentum impacts between flesh, bone and earth there is a lot that can go wrong. As players and spectators we all love the “ooff” factor of a big hit is exciting and part of the psychological ascendancy that a team looks to establish, however, we all want players to walk off the field. “Dominate do not destroy” is part of my front row talk and it applies to all players, who must have a responsibility to fellow players for their safety.

Much of the criticism of Alain Rolland has been that he has ruined the tournament, Wales were a better team than France and almost certainly would have won with 15 men, thus making a much more competitive final. However, the referee is tasked with managing that game, nothing more. He must make it safe, he must make it fair and he must must punish dangerous play within the parameters he has been given. What ever the consequences for Wales, Alain Rolland full-filled this function and throughout the rest of the game I found him to fair and consistent. Wales did enough to win that match, a little better luck with kicks and we would have still be looking forward to a Final on Sunday.

The broader topic must be how we want the game to be managed by the IRB. Many of the same people saying the red card spoilt the game and the tournament were bellowing for Mealamu to have been red carded for the O’Driscoll tackle. As fans we must be consistent, if we accept that red cards are to be a part of the game we can not apply them selectively. Perhaps red cards should only be used for a foul play; punching, gouging, head butts, ‘genuine’ spear tackles? The latter will keep the debate open on where the line should be drawn.

Upsetting the Saffas

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:45:00 +0000

Runs in the Lawrence family Referee fiasco sends out the wrong message

Top Ref Slams Lawrence

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:36:00 +0000

I think is pretty unheard of in the modern game for a senior referee to criticise another in such a public manner

Lawrence baffles Watson