McCallum and Mascord on NRL refereeing standards

[Vee]

From http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rug...-in-nrl-refereeing-ranks-20170722-gxgr0k.html

Decorated referee Greg McCallum has issued a withering assessment of the state or refereeing and of the NRL in the wake of the Sia Soliola affair. The former Test and grand final whistler says referees boss Tony Archer must go for presiding over a regime which saw the Raider stay on the field after his hit on Billy Slater. Archer himself then made immediate statements which McCallum described as "prejudicial" to Soliola getting a fair hearing from the match review committee and judiciary.

"The time has come for people who have some experience and knowledge to speak up," McCallum told Set Of Six on Sunday. "I care about the game; 35 years and it has never been so vulnerable across the board. Ego has overtaken the ability to get right decisions and importantly the ability to communicate them. The destruction of the rules replaced by soft option interpretations was always going to lead to this breakdown – for example: moving off the mark and allowing them to go back and play it again, passing off the ground – go back and play it again. My view is that Archer must go before this mess can be rectified."

Fair call. I've been thinking similar thoughts for years now.

2. Two wrongs make a bigger wrong

In the view of Set of Six,the decision to leave Soliola on the field followed by a media release saying he should have been sent off does not reflect an error followed by an attempted correction. It reflects one error compounded by another, in both cases caused by a deep-seated fear of "bad optics", leading to a lack of intestinal fortitude. Well said, a complete lack of integrity that starts at the top of the NRL - Graham, Greenberg etc.

"It looks like to me that initially he [Cecchin] was going to dismiss him – touches his forearm in the period while treatment was being given," McCallum said, while speculating that the Bunker got involved. "Again process not followed – hence Archer's statement in haste to cover up yet another poor process, which has become a weekly event."

The fact it is two years since the NRL saw a sending off must mean it has become an unsafe environment for players; like a society where no one has faced worse punishment than a night in the lock-up. Too many people involved in the NRL are obsessed with the NRL and what local shock jocks say about the NRL; how about trying to get things right regardless of what appears in tinpot columns like this and then going home and thinking about something else? It is, after all, just a footy comp the rest of the world does not know or care about. Just try to get it right and bugger what everyone says until it's time for you to move on to another job.

I was going to post on this when Archer made his statement but couldn't articulate the problem. I was thinking it was a denial of natural justice but "prejudicial" works just as well.

Mascord, far and away the best RL person in the media.

 

[Vee]

And Kent's contribution (Foxsports.com.au:

IN March last year Martin Taupau took down Jack Bird in a shot that was late and high and textbook assault.
The last Bird remembered was running towards the defence with strong ambition. He dropped the ball and turned to retrieve it and while he took more steps towards Taupua, who was cocked and loaded, Taupau swung and landed.

Taupau stayed on the field while Jack Bird’s head ached for three days. It did not matter, the judiciary would make right what the referee did not.

The following day Taupau was hit with a sentence so frighteningly light, just one week, it seemed like a conspiracy.

Three months later match review chairman Michael Buettner admitted to the coaches at their regular conference that the panel got their grading wrong. Well done to Buettner.

More, the coaches were in such fine spirits they agreed that the Taupau tackle should be deemed send-off worthy and for once there seemed to be universal agreement among them.

The NRL jotted it down.

A year later, we seemed to have forgotten everything, and so once again the NRL assumes its natural state, the forward brace position, as it tries to deal with the fallout of so many mixed messages.

The game needs clarity.

It needs to determine what it is and what it looks like. What it stands for and what it accepts.

Instead the game has again been caught trying to be all things to all people. Tough and combative but family friendly.

Sia Soliola hits Billy Slater late and high on Saturday night and stays on the field while the Melbourne medical staff have a serious discussion about whether Slater needs to go to hospital.

Soliola has mitigating factors in his defence. Slater slipped and was falling like he was going down a mineshaft when Soliola hit him. But he was late when he should not have been and he cannot defend that.

An hour after the game referees boss Tony Archer put out a statement saying the Soliola tackle met the indicators for a send-off.

They include force. In other words, is the arm swinging? Was the fist clenched?
It includes point of contact. In this case, an arm against a head.
It includes the position of the player struck and whether it was late.
Did the referee miss that? Or did he fail to acknowledge it?

Buettner and his men this time made no similar error to last year and referred him immediately to the judiciary, do not pass go.

That Soliola was not sent off, and that the referees boss indicated he should have been, adds to the game’s lazy state of confusion.

The constant add-ons with rules and interpretations shroud the game in complete confusion.

And too often the games makes a decision for its future and forgets its past.

So now the NRL is, apparently, a game where a player will be sent for a 10-minute spell in the sin bin for laying on a player for a second too long, robbing them of the chance to score a try, but a player who illegally takes out an opponent stays on.

How did we get here?

In its first years the sin bin was available for foul play. What happened, players would foul an opponent and referees began taking the soft option of sin-binning them instead of sending them off for good.

People protested.

So the game tinkered, declaring the sin bin would be reserved for professional fouls while foul play would result in dismissal.

Only somebody fell in love with the charging system, the safe option, and they forgot about the dismissal altogether as foul play began to get referred.

Here the game should have stepped in and corrected the course.

Now, hardly anybody gets sent.

The difficulty is the last send-off came two years ago when David Shillington got walked in a major over-reaction to a previous violence.

The game is riddled with a lack of confidence. Second-guessing themselves, referees now take the road of safety first.

It has got so out of control the game rules are being strangled by its own interpretations and procedures, dressed up as “indicators”.

That other quality, what the best in any business call instinct, left long ago.

It is up to the game to correct it, though. The referees need to be told how to officiate instead of the other way around.

To do that, the game needs to determine what it wants to look like.

I'm more of a fan of PK than most on here though I do recognise when he is going soft. Haven't seen his defence of Sticky yet but this is a good summary of where the reffing has gone wrong IMO.

 

[Vee]

From Foxsports

Warren Smith's view:

WELL, here we are again, just about like clockwork, with the rugby league world imploding before our eyes because of those damn referees.
The demand for heads on pikes took a little longer to come around this year, but you knew we were always going to reach the point in the season where everything that’s wrong in the game can be pinned on the one team that everybody hates — the refs.

That’s right, the refs are a team — the NRL’s 17th team — and you could hold their fan appreciation day in your average-size broom cupboard.

Nobody likes the refs. I mean, they’re the sole reason your team lost at the weekend, why they will finish, again, outside the top eight, and why your players will be sipping piña coladas on a Mexican beach in September while the serious teams are playing finals footy.

Yep, the refs suck.

I mean, they’re so bad, they forgot to send-off one of your players last weekend for nearly decapitating the opposition fullback.

The hide of them!

I know you’re steaming hot about all of this, but if you could put down your pitchfork and torch for a moment I think we might be able to make some headway into working out how we arrived at what feels like a fork in the road.

But then, doesn’t it always?

We could talk about refs no longer having a feel for the game, how there’s too many of them, how the damn bunker couldn’t find its backside with both hands and on and on we could go.

But what we really need to talk about is how, at some point in the past, the people in charge of the game decided that the best thing the referees could do was to not referee.

You know, they could rule on knock-ons and stuff, but we don’t want too many penalties.

Penalties are bad because penalties upset half of the people in the crowd and all of the people on the punt who backed the team that just got penalised.

And you know what those people do? They tweet about it and ring talkback radio shows and tell everybody how bad the refs are and how they’re killing the game.

Besides, we all know Lord Bill Harrigan was the best referee that ever put gel in his hair and Bill never blew the whistle in all those great Origin games we used to watch so that’s what we need to do.

No penalties.

Instead of penalties we’ll manage the game. Just like Bill. If we see an incorrect play the ball we’ll let it slide and have a quiet word at the next scrum.

When the touchie whispers to me that the winger is too often offside, I’ll give him the evil eye and make sure he doesn’t dare jump the gun again.

Just like Bill.

That way they won’t be able to tear us a new one on the back page of the paper because we ruined a game for blowing too many penalties.

Which is fine in theory, but the game evolves. Teams decide that the best way to slow down the play the ball is to turn the tackled player into a potty calf and wrestle him to the ground with a headlock that could render Dwayne Johnson unconscious.

They decide that the crusher, the chicken wing and the rolling pin are the best way to win the ground and control the game.

And you know what? It works.

But it’s not much of a spectacle, and they’re blowing up about it on the back page of the paper again, so we better crack down on it.

But not too many penalties. Remember — penalties are bad.

No whistles, lots of managing.

I’m being facetious, right? Maybe, but only a little.

How else do you explain how we got to the point in 2017 where you can take a goal line dropout from the wrong side of the line?

There’s no easier law to enforce than one that involves kicking the ball from the correct side of a line, but if we can’t get that one right, what hope is there for the rest of the book?

It’s such a small, almost meaningless rule, but the fact that it’s not enforced tells you a lot about the mindset of the custodians of the game.

No penalties. Don’t give anybody any ammo to fill us full of lead again.

And so we let that one slide, and we let players plant the ball on the ground before rising to their feet to play it.

Don’t worry about touching it with your foot when you do play it, either, because we’ll ignore that as well.

Move off the mark to disadvantage the defensive team? No problem.

All in the name of letting the game flow and not blowing penalties.

It provides a better spectacle, they tell us.

Except it doesn’t. It creates an imbalance between attack and defence that causes the defensive team to look for ways to redress the imbalance, slow down the play the ball and give themselves a chance to compete.

So they throw more defenders into tackles, they grapple, they bear hug, they put hands on the ball and what do you know, the ref blows a penalty.

But only as a last resort.

The blowing of the penalty in play the ball infringements is now an instant lightning rod for opinion because in so many cases the penalty could easily go either way.

Was the defender hanging on too long or did the man with the ball take shortcuts in playing it?

How long is a piece of string?

We’ll never know, because what happens on the field in 2017 has never had less connection with how the laws of the game are written.

The game isn’t refereed, it’s managed.

Should you suggest to the game’s administrators that actually applying the rules as they’re written might be worth exploring, they’ll instantly tell you that it would make the game unwatchable, that interest would drop off quickly and that the game as a highly marketable entertainment vehicle would soon be relegated to a second tier sporting property.

But the alternative to that is what? What we have now?

I think the game is a fantastic sport to watch, that it’s mostly always entertaining and that the athletes playing it are world class.

And while there will always be fans, and coaches, who want to use the referee as the easiest excuse for their teams’ inability to win, there are too many occasions in which we give the ref-bashers a free hit by putting the people at the centre of the controversy, the referees, in an untenable position.

They’ll be dammed if they do and damned if they don’t blow the whistle.

They can’t win.

It might forever be the case, but rugby league’s administrators owe it to them to at least give them a fighting shot.

Would they ever be willing to endure a few weeks of pain, negative press, hot takes and viral tweets, by letting the referees tidy up the contest and apply the laws as they’re written?

I haven’t seen anybody willing to stand their ground — somebody who can tell the critics to like it or lump — at any time it in the past, and I doubt I will in the future.

The calls grow louder and the momentum for change increases but who has any confidence in the NRL identifying and appointing the right person to take charge and fix the problem?

 

[TheVelourFog]

yes, yes, yes

either apply the rules or change them

 

[POPEYE]

The game just has to return to being about the players, not the referees . . . a referees' boss in control would issue an ultimatum that the 'necessary' should be enacted upon and the 'unnecessary' not be used to showpony

 

[OldPanther]

Yes. Stop trying to manage the game. Officiate to the rules and let teams play properly within them or suffer. Stop trying to interpret everything. 50/50 penalties are a blight on the game.

 

[POPEYE]

50/50 stoppages don't help either

 

[Nice Beaver]

Yes. Stop trying to manage the game. Officiate to the rules and let teams play properly within them or suffer. Stop trying to interpret everything. 50/50 penalties are a blight on the game.

This whole 'manage the game' crap was spawned from Harrigan's time in charge of the refs.

IMO his reign was worse than this peanut Archer's.

Slothfield's solution? Bring back Harrigan. It's like he wants the NRL to fail so he can continue his agenda.

 

[Mr Angry]

Yep it is just fine for a player to spill the ball, miss a tackle, kick it out on the full, give away a stupid penalty....mistakes happen.
But referees must be perfect at all times or the sky falls in.
I am amazed we have refs, thankless job and given crap at every opportunity.
Yeah the refs are why the top 4 and bottom 4 are where they...not the player, not the coach, it is those evil refs...
f**king joke this subject.

 

[Nice Beaver]

Yep it is just fine for a player to spill the ball, miss a tackle, kick it out on the full, give away a stupid penalty....mistakes happen.
But referees must be perfect at all times or the sky falls in.
I am amazed we have refs, thankless job and given crap at every opportunity.
Yeah the refs are why the top 4 and bottom 4 are where they...not the player, not the coach, it is those evil refs...
f**king joke this subject.

Lol

 

[age.s]

The problem isn't the rules, its the severity (and to some degree variability) of the punishment. Penalties are game deciding and often completely out of whack for the severity of the crime. 40+ meters and 6 more tackles for a minor ruck infringement?

This is the reason refs are scared to enforce the rules. So you get inconsistency. You get refs more likely to blow a penalty early in the count or if the ball is in one corner of the field. You get rules completely ignored for seasons at a time only to be applied at random. You get crackdowns on X that last for about a fortnight. Players and coaches aren't stupid, they exploit this inconsistency and the problem compounds with games that are objectively harder to officiate.

We want consistency but that's not possible when the penalty is the only option refs have to enforce the rules of the game as they currently stand.

 

[Canard]

The annual Round 20 media meltdown on referees.

There's only one enduring tradition in Rugby League, whinging about the referees.

 

[KeepingTheFaith]

What are the odds on a player getting sent off in the next couple of weeks?

 

[Haffa]

What are the odds on a player getting sent off in the next couple of weeks?

You just know if it happens Cecchin is the one most likely to act.

 

[Life's Good]

Yep it is just fine for a player to spill the ball, miss a tackle, kick it out on the full, give away a stupid penalty....mistakes happen.
But referees must be perfect at all times or the sky falls in.
I am amazed we have refs, thankless job and given crap at every opportunity.
Yeah the refs are why the top 4 and bottom 4 are where they...not the player, not the coach, it is those evil refs...
f**king joke this subject.

Missing head high tackles, knock ons, forward passes etc. are ok in your book??

 

[Meapro Ham]

The problem isn't the rules, its the severity (and to some degree variability) of the punishment. Penalties are game deciding and often completely out of whack for the severity of the crime. 40+ meters and 6 more tackles for a minor ruck infringement?

This is the reason refs are scared to enforce the rules. So you get inconsistency. You get refs more likely to blow a penalty early in the count or if the ball is in one corner of the field. You get rules completely ignored for seasons at a time only to be applied at random. You get crackdowns on X that last for about a fortnight. Players and coaches aren't stupid, they exploit this inconsistency and the problem compounds with games that are objectively harder to officiate.

We want consistency but that's not possible when the penalty is the only option refs have to enforce the rules of the game as they currently stand.

Yes. I agree with this. They need to consider other options for minor infringements. Take away the kick for touch or just restart the tackle count. A kick for touch and 6 more tackles is too much of a game changer for minor infringements.

 

[LeagueXIII]

From http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rug...-in-nrl-refereeing-ranks-20170722-gxgr0k.html

Decorated referee Greg McCallum has issued a withering assessment of the state or refereeing and of the NRL in the wake of the Sia Soliola affair. The former Test and grand final whistler says referees boss Tony Archer must go for presiding over a regime which saw the Raider stay on the field after his hit on Billy Slater. Archer himself then made immediate statements which McCallum described as "prejudicial" to Soliola getting a fair hearing from the match review committee and judiciary.

"The time has come for people who have some experience and knowledge to speak up," McCallum told Set Of Six on Sunday. "I care about the game; 35 years and it has never been so vulnerable across the board. Ego has overtaken the ability to get right decisions and importantly the ability to communicate them. The destruction of the rules replaced by soft option interpretations was always going to lead to this breakdown – for example: moving off the mark and allowing them to go back and play it again, passing off the ground – go back and play it again. My view is that Archer must go before this mess can be rectified."

Fair call. I've been thinking similar thoughts for years now.

2. Two wrongs make a bigger wrong

In the view of Set of Six,the decision to leave Soliola on the field followed by a media release saying he should have been sent off does not reflect an error followed by an attempted correction. It reflects one error compounded by another, in both cases caused by a deep-seated fear of "bad optics", leading to a lack of intestinal fortitude. Well said, a complete lack of integrity that starts at the top of the NRL - Graham, Greenberg etc.

"It looks like to me that initially he [Cecchin] was going to dismiss him – touches his forearm in the period while treatment was being given," McCallum said, while speculating that the Bunker got involved. "Again process not followed – hence Archer's statement in haste to cover up yet another poor process, which has become a weekly event."

The fact it is two years since the NRL saw a sending off must mean it has become an unsafe environment for players; like a society where no one has faced worse punishment than a night in the lock-up. Too many people involved in the NRL are obsessed with the NRL and what local shock jocks say about the NRL; how about trying to get things right regardless of what appears in tinpot columns like this and then going home and thinking about something else? It is, after all, just a footy comp the rest of the world does not know or care about. Just try to get it right and bugger what everyone says until it's time for you to move on to another job.

I was going to post on this when Archer made his statement but couldn't articulate the problem. I was thinking it was a denial of natural justice but "prejudicial" works just as well.

Mascord, far and away the best RL person in the media.

That is spot on. I am sick of the rules being watered down you don't see it an any other sport it's just plain stupid.

 

[LeagueXIII]

I just want to see them play the ball with their bloody foot.

The best games I have seen were the Second Tests from 1985 and 1990 between Australia and NZ and Gt Britain and both were refereed by a Frenchman!!!

Harrigan was an ego on legs he made mistakes also....ignoring rules being the biggest.

 

[Mr Angry]

Missing head high tackles, knock ons, forward passes etc. are ok in your book??

No, but they mistakes, they are no perfect.

Making the head high, knocking on, forwards passes all seem forgiveable, as long as it is a player on a million dollars, but a ref on f**k all misses on and lets get the pitch forks out.

 

[Mr Angry]

Does anyone know what refs get paid?

Are they on Daly Evans money?

Why is it ok for him to make 4 errors in a game, but the ref must be perfect?

You would all make great wives.