It’s true that, sometimes, referees don’t get it right. It’s also true that the outcomes of some games are decided by a contentious refereeing decision. Yet, of course, in our see-no-good-in-anything-or-anyone (see last week’s rant) game, rare is the occasion where the referee has praise heaped upon him.

I speak fairly regularly with a couple of Premiership referees about the game in general and those involving Saracens in particular, and both despair at the things they read from supporters who think that their team was robbed or the game ruined by the merry whistle blower and his henchmen.

Thankfully in rugby - both codes – the sole arbiter of fact and law has the respect of the 30 blokes under his control, yet he does not have it from the paying public who seem to be hell-bent of picking faults rather than admiring what is, let’s face it, a most difficult job.

Some supporters argue that referees are there for the reasons of self-promotion rather than the promotion of a fast, open, entertaining game of rugby. Some complain endlessly that the touch judges are spineless; ignoring all the “blatant” forward passes, knocks-on and offside offences committed by the opposition (never, ever their own team) and that there is some pre-meditated plan to ensure that the “other” team wins because they are the spawn of the devil and their own XV whiter than white.

This is, if you have half a semblance of what constitutes impartiality, abject nonsense. Who do you think would have a better grasp of the laws? A referee who is tested regularly on the laws which, if he has managed to get himself to the top of the pyramid, he has had to learn for many years, or the bloke in the stand who still calls a touch judge a linesman, and who still measures the field in yards?

Who would have the better view of the offences committed on the field? A referee five metres away or a bloke 80m away in row Z? A sober, impartial official with a responsibility for ensuring fair play for both sides or a beer-soaked, one-eyed fan who cares passionately about fair play, so long as it’s his team that gets it all?

You know the answers.

What irks me is not the fact that referees can be bad; as long as the ref is equally bad for both sides, then that’s fine with me, and with the coaches and players. What irks me is that those who complain about how the laws are applied, or not, are ignorant of the facts and the potential outcome that the realisation of their demands would bring.

Let’s start with some facts about touch judges that are either not known by we experts in the stands, or chosen to be ignored. TJs are there to do two things:

1. Mark Touch
2. Report serious foul play

What’s more it is that the clubs themselves have an input into the roles and responsibilities of the merry flag wavers and are happy with them being restricted to just those two above. The coaches and players, who consult with officialdom regularly, don’t want touch judges calling every slight knock on, or slightly forward pass, or a line-out throw that’s 10cm off-centre. Those coaching and playing at the top level will go along with this because it makes for fewer set pieces and a more open, flowing game, something that is conveniently forgotten by your average man in the stand.

I am cast-iron certain that if the man in the stand’s wishes were granted and every single minor (or blatant, of course, if you are the man in the stand) infringement were penalised, he’d be the first to be complaining about the officials ruining the game by whistling for everything and that 80 minutes of scrummaging is not why he pays for his (overpriced, of course) ticket. Make up your mind, man, you’re starting to look and sound a little befuddled. And it’s not just down to the (overpriced, of course) beer.

The fallout of the London Irish v Saracens game included several tirades from the home fans directed at referee Dave Pearson because, according to them, he was pro-Sarries. I’d hardly call an 8-2 penalty count in the first half hour in favour of Irish pro-Sarries. Even if the penalty count went the other way, would Piglet have made it all up? Does it ever register with anyone that the players are more responsible for making a game a bad one? “Play what’s in front of you” is an age-old mantra for players, “Whistle what you see” is one for referees. It seems that two teams hell-bent on killing the ball and the breakdown or constantly offside can be forgiven and it’s the man in the middle that is to blame every time. That isn’t right.

As far as the refs themselves go, the things spouted by fans in the ground and in cyberspace that annoy them above all else are the perception of some supporters that they are out to ruin a good afternoon’s entertainment, or that they want to be centre of attention. Referees are there for the very same reason as you, me, man in the stand, the players, coaches and journalists: they do it because they LOVE the game and they too want to be part of one that is end-to-end, full of attacking flair and continuity, rather than be forced – by the players if they wish, and the man in the stand if he had his way – to whistle it to a halt every 30 seconds.

So next time you want to take out your frustration on Ash, Barnsey, Debbers, Foxy, Piglet, Rosey, Sean, Spreaders, Whitey et al, spare a thought  for them before you do and bear in mind what they have to go through to make your weekend and mine what it is and realise that, without them and the commitment they put into rugby, we’d all be down the garden centre.

Bookmark or share this story with:

• Digg
• Delicious
• Facebook
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon

SPORTNETWORK SPECIALS

• Think you know your sport? Click here to try the Sportnetwork Prize Quizzes