Refereeing decisions

[Hugh Jarse]

I am fairly sure that John "Scoreboards do not lie" Jeffrey is a enough of a gentleman not to let his Scottish heritage colour or prejudice any decision he makes in his capacity as Head of Referees, after all how can you dislike anyone who's only regret about their occupation as a farmer is that "If I stand on a hill I can see England"?

Perception is reality, and notwithstanding his membership of the ABE Society and his probable impartiality, the perception of bias and vested interest is strong and it takes little to stir up the Tin Foil Hat, Flaming Torches and Pitchfork brigade.

Regardless of that perception of bias or not, IMHO certain statements should not be in the public domain and it is fairly poor judgement to allow that to occur.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Maybe World Rugby just felt they needed to chastise him because the plan is that he referees the final if South Africa doesn't make it.

Owens would be unbackable favorite after not getting a semi wouldn't he?

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

 

[Braveheart81]

Owens would be unbackable favorite after not getting a semi wouldn't he?

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

I agree. I think Owens will referee the final. I was being facetious.

 

[Quick Hands]

Owens would be unbackable favorite after not getting a semi wouldn't he?

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

Absolutely.

 

[swingpass]

Forget that angle @Inside Shoulder, How about they rely on "evidence" collected from refcam to retroactively humiliate a referee, and most likely end their career via the court of public opinion?

i bet we will never see that view because it probably shows only the two scots involved, and no Phipps hand/finger/bees dick near the ball, which is why in the split second available to him Joubert ruled offside

 

[Quick Hands]

At worst it was a 50/50 call. I'm sure we've all seen similar incidents penalised for offside, similar incidents ruled accidental offside and similar incidents ruled as a knock-on.

It certainly wasn't a howling error or even a mistake at law, merely a subjective interpretation on the run by a referee. Many like calls are made in every game and every 50/50 decision could go the other way.

The Scots seem to have influence in high places as this follows on from the disgraceful disciplinary "process" whereby two players who lifted an opponent beyond the horizontal and said player went head first into the turf, were found not guilty, despite pleading guilty.

 

[Dan54]

Oh shit, he missed the ball hitting ,or Phipps grabbing at it, if it was in middle or early in game noone would of noticed. I imagine if we all looked at any test more mistakes are made by refs, it just happened when the underdog was trying to hold on to win. I can understand the Jocks being a pissed, as I have said if it was against Wallabies this bored would of melted down with conspiacy theories etc ( a bit like QHs) . I think it time to admit Wallabies were lucky, but it in no way should lessen their win etc.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Forget that angle @Inside Shoulder, How about they rely on "evidence" collected from refcam to retroactively humiliate a referee, and most likely end their career via the court of public opinion?

this thread moves too fast: do they have that angle?

 

[Quick Hands]

Can a player within 10 metres of the play be put onside by the actions of an opponent?

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Here is a camera angle from Joubert's Post Game Debrief outside the Referee Selection Committee room.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Can a player within 10 metres of the play be put onside by the actions of an opponent?

That depends on how he came to be offside - he cant be if its was kicked from behind him:
In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by an action of the opposing team. These three ways do not apply to a player who is offside under the 10-Metre Law.
11.3
http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=11

 

[Quick Hands]

Here is a camera angle from Joubert's Post Game Debrief outside the Referee Selection Committee room.View attachment 7114

The lightning speed of WR (World Rugby) on this matter is so out of character with the usual glacial speed in which they normally operate.

I look forward to WR (World Rugby) providing a decision by decision analysis of every match at the end of the tournament.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^^ Regardless of your opinion of how Joubers performed, this act sets a dangerous precedent and unless they do precisely what @Quick Hands suggests, they will be open to claim of being hypocrites.

One of the pillars of Rugby is that the referee is supposed to be beyond reproach. Selective public humiliation of one of their top match officials from the Governing Body undermines a basic tenet of the game. How can they expect players not to follow suit and start criticising referees during the game?

All this from an organisation that appeals (unsuccessfully) the findings of its own Judicial Officials.

I look forward to the next public statement from World Rugby apologising to Samoa for the incorrect ruling on the knock on in the lead up to the crucial try in their RWC match against Scotland.

 

[Dan54]

Can a player within 10 metres of the play be put onside by the actions of an opponent?

Yes!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Yes!

The correct answer is "sometimes":

While moving away, the offside player cannot be put onside by any action of the opposing team.
http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=11

 

[mark_s]

[quote="Hugh Jarse, post: 803133, member: 2072
I look forward to the next public statement from World Rugby apologising to Samoa for the incorrect ruling on the knock on in the lead up to the crucial try in their RWC match against Scotland.[/quote]

This is the biggest issue with the statement from World Rugby. Why comment only on this decision? It's arguable that it was even a bad decision and certainly wasn't the worst one in the game, which I think was the YC awarded to the Scottish winger which I think nearly everyone agrees was harsh and led to an Australian try.

More generally, commenting on individual decisions is a slippery slope for World Rugby. They either do it consistently and impartially or not at all. Also, it would need to in the context not of whether this decision was right or wrong, but was the judgement reasonable or not.

The NRL has tried commenting on its contentious decisions for the last few years. While it improves transparency and, in the longer term, trust/engagement with fans and quality of onfield adjudication. A surprising number of the individual decisions remain controversial or a matter of judgement even after frame by frame anaylsis from multiple angles. And this is a game with simpler rules than rugby

 

[Sully]

You can add the first Scottish try. That was 7 points the never should have been. All three scrum penalties were also questionable. Where do you stop? Should every scrum resulting in a penalty go to the tmo?

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Should every scrum resulting in a penalty go to the tmo?

No - it should go to "World Rugby" for endorsement of the proposed ruling

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Jonathan Kaplan has floated the concept of a Captains Challenge, allowing a Team Captain to request a ruling from the TMO.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...ower-says-former-test-referee-jonathan-kaplan

It works in Cricket and Tennis. Could it work in rugby?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Jonathan Kaplan has floated the concept of a Captains Challenge, allowing a Team Captain to request a ruling from the TMO.

It works in Cricket and Tennis. Could it work in rugby?

Not sure it works in cricket. Half the world wont adopt it.
Shane Watson likes to use it, though. To no avail.