There’s a bit of an affirmative action thing going on here which is hurting the product. I’m a big supporter of women in league, but the pool of male referees is just so much bigger. If they’re mandating that at least two regular first grade referees be female, the pool of candidates for those jobs could honestly be 1% the size or less than the pool of male candidates. Likely even smaller!The refereeing this year is as bad as I've ever seen. The inconsistencies from week to week are ruining the product.
I watched the second half of Titans/Tigers before our game and it was borderline unwatchable. Incorrect call, captains challenge, bullshit 6 again, random play the ball infringement that's not called any other time, captains challenge etc etc. Rinse repeat until Belinda Sharpe misses a Tigers knock on (her 50th error of the day) and they go down and kick a BS field goal.
You can’t pick 20%+ of the referees from a pool of less than 1% of candidates. Almost definitionally this means that Sharpe, Badger etc have the job over two more deserving male candidates. Bad refereeing can decide games unfairly. There is too much invested in the game to allow that.
And ultimately I don’t think it’s good for inclusion either, I bet plenty of punters think that women make shit referees now and we straight up shouldn’t have any, because Sharpe and Badger are so bad. Whereas, there’s no biological reason why women would be worse, there just aren’t many of them around, and they haven’t been doing it as long. They’re not getting the job on the basis of being in the top percentile of referees in the sport, they’re just better than all the relatively inexperienced women.
I’m absolutely open to the idea of a merit-based selection meaning we end up with a female referee or two, but all the referees should come from one pool. Female participation in the sport has been trending up for years. Let the march of progress follow its natural course. Don’t force it.