My son started to show an interest in rugby in the spring of 2003, when I was invited by a supplier to enjoy some Corporate Hostility at Twickenham for one of the England 6 Nations matches, and Jack asked if he was coming too! Instead, I took him to a couple of Saracens matches that autumn, and we have hardly missed a home game since. In January 2004 he started playing Tag Rugby at our local rugby club. He continued to play, with a fair amount of success and a lot of enjoyment, but when they graduated to contact rugby at Under 9, they were short of a coach, so I offered to step in, along with two other dads, and we duly went on a Level 1 RFU training course.  

As I was the only one of the three who had thought to acquire a whistle, I found myself elected referee. Like many another, I had expended a fair amount of hot air on criticising the performance of the variety of referees, particularly at Vicarage Road. Now I was stepping into the limelight, albeit on a much smaller scale, with pretty much the sole qualification of owning a whistle. Now with an RFU “National Referee Mini-Midi Certificate” in my wallet, I can look back at four seasons of experience. So how am I shaping up, and how do I feel about it now? 

One of the things I have found fascinating is that a number of colleagues from other clubs, whose game management I have greatly admired, have made fundamental mistakes in interpreting the laws. For example, a referee from a very big club nearby, apparently very experienced and running the game well, awarded a penalty for a driving maul going more than 1.5 metres. Now there is a penalty offence, both in the Continuum that governs play from Under 7 to Under 12, and in Junior rugby up to Under 19, that the scrum cannot be pushed more than 1.5m. This is clearly what was in his mind, but it only applies to scrums and he was just plain wrong. 

More to the point is the familiar accusation of blindness. We can all recite a long list of offences that the referee has missed, sometimes right in front of him: how can this possibly happen if the referee is even moderately competent?  

Frankly this is a big part of why I hate refereeing: you need eyes in the back of your head to see what is going on behind you and x-ray vision to see what is happening on the far side of the scrum, ruck or maul. More than that, you often need to be actually looking for an offence to be sure of seeing it.  

Take the line out for example: the Law Book has 16 main clauses on the line out alone, and many of those have numerous sub-clauses. There are 65 separate offences at the line-out, 21 full penalty offences plus 24 free kick (but ignoring the effect of the ELVs). The blindingly obvious offence is “not straight” but if the referee is watching out for backs creeping offside, counting numbers in the line out or any of the many other offences, he may not have time to observe the flight of the ball. Conversely, if he watches the ball in flight it is very difficult also to see some of the shenanigans that take place at ground level between opposite numbers in the line. 

I have never discussed this with “proper” referees, but I am sure that with experience and tutoring etc, your observation skills improve a lot. However, the crowd will always see some obvious mistakes, and TV, with the benefit of 5 different camera angles and slow motion, plus 5 minutes in which to study a 3 second passage of play, will inevitably be able to produce examples of the referee’s utter incompetence. 

Another thing that I find daunting is the need to identify any of the innumerable possible scenarios and make the correct decision each time. There are fascinating puzzles where a passage of play is described and the reader is challenged to say what should happen, but in the game you have just a few seconds to make your decision. In a typical tackle/ruck situation, there are several players involved, and most of them will be committing at least one offence. For example, Law 16.3 (e), “Players must have their head and shoulders no lower than their hips”. So between “Holding on”, “Not rolling away”, “Coming in at the side”, “Going straight to ground”, “Off your feet” and “Hands in the ruck”, how do you decide which offence to penalise, or even which team? 

The key is (I think) to concentrate on offences that are changing the course of the game. So an offence that leads to a turnover or prevents a legitimate turnover is more significant than one that doesn’t. However, offences that go unpunished may be repeated and become more influential on the game. For example, shirt pulling on someone who is already unlikely to get to the ball can escalate into more serious off-the-ball fouls if unpunished. The best referees talk to the players to say “Don’t do that again” or similar, to show that they have seen the offence and will only tolerate it up to a point. 

What about the influence of the players, coaches and spectators on the referee? Personally, I usually as much of a problem with my own assessment of my performance as with anyone else’s opinion, although of course there are times when the losing team and their entourage blame it on the referee.  If other referees don’t always know the Laws, the players certainly don’t, especially with the age groups I have refereed, and although some spectators know more than I do, many have only a hazy idea. The same could perhaps be said about certain TV commentators! 

When I am a spectator, whether watching the kids or the professional game, I try to moderate any criticism I might want to make of the referee, and to understand his point of view. Having said that, I was so angry with Ospreys getting away with persistent offending at the Millennium Stadium last year, my wife was in tears and seriously thought I was going to make myself seriously ill and begged me to stop.  

I hate people accusing the referee of bias, taking money or sleeping with the players’ wives. Half the time the crowd get carried away and talk nonsense, like the time at Gloucester in the Guinness play-offs: we were sitting behind the goal and the referee gave a forward pass decision against us near the far 22 and some of the Sarries supporters around us were declaring that he was wrong – but using more colloquial language of course. How do you think you can see a forward pass from 80 metres in front of the action better than from alongside? All referees make mistakes or get things wrong, even in World Cup Finals: actually, so do players!  

The only reason I am prepared to act as referee is to enable the kids to enjoy the best game there is. I try to make sure that I am as competent as possible, but I am acutely aware of my own failings. I love coaching, and it is fantastically rewarding to see your players learning and growing up as players, not to mention when something you have been working on comes off in a match. Unfortunately, someone has to referee, and to be honest I find it worse to watch them being poorly refereed than to take responsibility and do it myself, however badly and however reluctantly.

View a Printer Friendly version of this Story.

Bookmark or share this story with:

• Digg
• Delicious
• Facebook
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon