If players can be cited after a match, why not referees?

The appallingly incompetent performance of Bryce Lawrence made my blood boil. In such a tight game one mistake is bad. But he systematically got key decisions wrong. He failed to spot the French putting on an early shove in the scrum. He called Foden's quick throw in not straight when he and the touch judge were 15-2o metres away.

There should be a system to bring this sort of incompetence to light and discipline the culprit, in this case Lawrence.

He cost us the Lions' series. And now a chance this match.

All top level referees' performances are officially assessed. I doubt Lawrence got a very good mark for this game.

"Bryce Lawrence was able to spot marginal infringements of dubious materiality, Lawrence was unable to see a host of more obvious offences "

"it would be interesting to hear Johnson's private views on the referee, Bryce Lawrence, because "Mr.Fastidious" gave a performance right out of the bottom drawer."

"England did not lose because of Lawrences's refereeing; they lost because they could not execute either of their two brilliantly fashioned chances in the second half. Nevertheless, Lawrence's demonstrably unbalanced focus on players wearinmg white at and around breakdowns and in set pieces made England's task more difficult."


Briam Moore Daily Telegraph March 22nd

Citing is for dangerous play rather than bad decision making. If citing were for bad decision making I would like to cite Nick Evans for those little chip kicks that lead to more tries for the opposition than for the Quins.

No matter how bad Lawrence's performance he will not be dropped from the international panel as he is the only New Zealander currently on the list. The IRB will never produce a list of top Refs that does not include a Kiwi.

Sorry guys, he's here to stay.

Quote:

He called Foden's quick throw in not straight when he and the touch judge were 15-2o metres away.

That was a good call, unfortunately.

---

BB

Leave off Lawrence, direct it too the IRB, they make the appointments, the Rugby World know all about his weaknesses but the IRB ignore it.

We have to learn to make officials like us a little more.

When you have Borthwick and MJ spouting cr#p about how good they were after abject performances and when you have a set up as charismatic as Wells,MJ,Squeaky...well that doesn't help.

Often you see other teams coaches/management come on the television and you think...what a charming,sensible person.
When someone from England comes on I tend to wince at the lack of warmth and approachability they exude.

Plus the fact that Lawrence is a one eyed goat who hates England and likes nothing better than to see us loose ( sorry...just watched some of his decisions again and it looks even worse )

If I was given a choice between England sorting out their mistakes and refs sorting out their mistakes I would choose England every single time.

But it's not a choice....

As an impartial observer I think he had a bit of a shocker. But we can all have bad days and it does seem unfair that players and the coaching staff can be called to account publicly yet not referees. I'm not advocating attacking the person but we should be able to criticise the referees performance without bringing the game into disrepute.

The problem with refereeing modern professional rugby is that it is a fast and complex game. Because the rules are complex it inevitably will give way to inconsistency in interpretation. that is where the different and collective rugby unions have to give vocal and public guidance to referee, players, coaches and a discerning public on interpretation. BUT they don't.

Then you have touch judges that on paper are assistant referees yet don't assist the referee.

I personally wouldn't be a referee. Life is too short.

No it's not a choice, I was simply highlighting that I am always far more concerned by the mistakes made by the team I support than by those of the ref. I see the ref's mistakes as incidental to the game.

The game is too complex and fast for one guy to ref it.

It needs two refs, plus 2 specialists for the scrum.

That would speed up and clean up the game for the benefit of all.

Quote:

quins4ever
If players can be cited after a match, why not referees?
The appallingly incompetent performance of Bryce Lawrence made my blood boil. In such a tight game one mistake is bad. But he systematically got key decisions wrong. He failed to spot the French putting on an early shove in the scrum. He called Foden's quick throw in not straight when he and the touch judge were 15-2o metres away.

There should be a system to bring this sort of incompetence to light and discipline the culprit, in this case Lawrence.

He cost us the Lions' series. And now a chance this match.

Ive been asking this for months I agree they should be accounted for same as players etc so on

---

But the refs are accountable - they get assessed, and can get demoted etc.

QP.

Lawrence will not get demoted, as politics demand that there is at least one Kiwi on the IRB international panel.

Also there seem to be some sort of papal infallibility around the IRB refs appointments. How else can Stuart Dickinson, who is yet to have a good game as an international referee, is still on the international panel after nearly ten years.

International referee's are like the civil service under Sir Humphrey Appleby. They can of course be demoted in theory, but in practice it never happens.

Quote:

Stuart Dickinson, who is yet to have a good game as an international referee

I can't argue against logic like that. [/sarcasm]

After virtually every game there are valid criticisms of the referee.

The fact is that refereeing standards are a really negative aspect of rugby these games.

It's a structural problem that needs fixing by the game's authorities.

I can't see the IRB ever publicly posting league tables for refs, as it will call their own decision making policies into question and we know that they have an unblemished record on sensible policy decisions!!!

Maybe more ex players becoming ref's or going back to the old day's of neutral NH ref's in the 6 nations is what's needed although they won't want to do that because of World Cup games.

Sorry that I can't resolve the issue.

Quote:

Brown Bottle

Quote:

He called Foden's quick throw in not straight when he and the touch judge were 15-2o metres away.

That was a good call, unfortunately.

It was a good call, and he was able to do it because there was a ruddy great line across the pitch to give him a frame of reference. ANYONE could've spotted that one, no matter how far away they were.

---

To quote the Proclaimers: "I'm on my way/From misery to happiness today [...] "

Supporting Leeds was never straightforward

Quote:

apb
It was a good call, and he was able to do it because there was a ruddy great line across the pitch to give him a frame of reference. ANYONE could've spotted that one, no matter how far away they were.

Er... no. If you've got the wrong angle it's impossible for you to judge whether the ball has gone forward or not, lines on the pitch or no.

A lineout thrown halfway across the pitch and landing a foot or two forward from where it's thrown... hm. Hope they apply that to every lineout, eh!

Whatever you think, it was the right call!

Quote:

Quinten Poulsen
Whatever you think, it was the right call!

It was probably the correct call. However it works the same as forward passes in terms of how you define it - is a pass that ends up going forward over 40m the same thing as "thrown towards the opposition tryline"?

We are talking a very small deviation considering the distance, and I don't think it's incorrect for people to suggest that the officials were guessing.

Guessing or not it was the correct call.

The fact is that he got it right, which means he either got lucky on a 50/50 guess, or it was a judgement based on experience from the way that the player had to adjust to pick up the ball, or he was influenced by the crowd or he was biased, or the touch judge advised him based on one of the above.

Who knows, but it was ridiculous to criticise him for getting it right!

But this incident was around the issue that the ball went out about 3 m outside the 22. so it wasn't forward from where the ball went out. Moore thought that was ok, but Butler said it wasn't, I haven't a clue who was right.

It's not from where the ball went out! It's from where you take the throw in.

Quote:

Quinten Poulsen
Guessing or not it was the correct call.

I think you missed the bit about how it's defined but never mind - my initial reply was mostly about the idiocy of thinking that because the ball was near a line it was easy for officials to make a proper call... despite them having exactly the wrong perspective.

I think it was probably the right call, just. I think it was also very pedantic. That ball went straighter than nearly every lineout in the match!

Don't start me on about TJ's and throw ins again......

---

Try,Try and Try again....!