England v Australia
-
@crucial said in England v Australia:
@antipodean said in England v Australia:
Sad reflection on World Rugby when Gardner is considered the best referee.
It all comes down to the process and the expectations that WR keep changing on these guys. I have some sympathy for AG as the refs still don't seem to be making decisions based on the same evidence everyone at home sees.
We don't like it when the TMO makes the decision, we don't like it if the ref makes a call without the TMO input and we don't like it when the ref ignores the TMO.
It is up to WR to stop fiddling with the process all the time but come up with a clear understandable way of reviewing decisions. Cricket managed to do it in a shorter period and now even if the decision is slightly debateable you know the process has been followed properly.This. Plus the refs never know when someone at World Rugby is going to publicly criticise their performance and tell everyone the ref got a crucial call wrong.
-
@antipodean said in England v Australia:
Sad reflection on World Rugby when Gardner is considered the best referee.
By whom?
Certainly not me.
-
@catogrande said in England v Australia:
@crucial said in England v Australia:
@antipodean said in England v Australia:
Sad reflection on World Rugby when Gardner is considered the best referee.
It all comes down to the process and the expectations that WR keep changing on these guys. I have some sympathy for AG as the refs still don't seem to be making decisions based on the same evidence everyone at home sees.
We don't like it when the TMO makes the decision, we don't like it if the ref makes a call without the TMO input and we don't like it when the ref ignores the TMO.
It is up to WR to stop fiddling with the process all the time but come up with a clear understandable way of reviewing decisions. Cricket managed to do it in a shorter period and now even if the decision is slightly debateable you know the process has been followed properly.This. Plus the refs never know when someone at World Rugby is going to publicly criticise their performance and tell everyone the ref got a crucial call wrong.
Again, it is the inconsistency that grates. Some decisions get commented on, others are treated like a state secret. It appears from the outside that it all depends on who your mates are.
I doubt anyone wants a post game post mortem but there are ways by which they can convey that they aim for perfection but accept that errors will happen.
WR could learn a lot from the big US sports. NFL has quick clear decisions that everyone accepts and moves on. Each week they release an Officiating Video to the media to explain big calls.
NBA also put up post game video reviews.
Rugby TV commentary teams could also learn a lot from the US guys who don't spent half their time winding up the audience with claims of poor decisions or 50/50 calls. They let the viewer do all that themselves without adding a form of confirmation or (Justin Marshall) adding their own interpretation of the laws into the mix.
The game has been pro for over 20 years but doesn't act like it sometimes. -
@catogrande said in England v Australia:
@crucial said in England v Australia:
@antipodean said in England v Australia:
Sad reflection on World Rugby when Gardner is considered the best referee.
It all comes down to the process and the expectations that WR keep changing on these guys. I have some sympathy for AG as the refs still don't seem to be making decisions based on the same evidence everyone at home sees.
We don't like it when the TMO makes the decision, we don't like it if the ref makes a call without the TMO input and we don't like it when the ref ignores the TMO.
It is up to WR to stop fiddling with the process all the time but come up with a clear understandable way of reviewing decisions. Cricket managed to do it in a shorter period and now even if the decision is slightly debateable you know the process has been followed properly.This. Plus the refs never know when someone at World Rugby is going to publicly criticise their performance and tell everyone the ref got a crucial call wrong.
Certainly World Rugby is run by incompetent amateurs.
@mikethesnow said in England v Australia:
@antipodean said in England v Australia:
Sad reflection on World Rugby when Gardner is considered the best referee.
By whom?
Certainly not me.
Same. If a player can fool a ref because the ref doesn't know the laws, I kinda think they shouldn't be promoted.
-
@mikethesnow said in England v Australia:
@antipodean said in England v Australia:
Sad reflection on World Rugby when Gardner is considered the best referee.
By whom?
Certainly not me.
I didn't know you were on the board of World Rugby Mike? It normally takes more than just a taste for gin.
-
@catogrande said in England v Australia:
@mikethesnow said in England v Australia:
@antipodean said in England v Australia:
Sad reflection on World Rugby when Gardner is considered the best referee.
By whom?
Certainly not me.
I didn't know you were on the board of World Rugby Mike? It normally takes more than just a taste for gin.
-
@crucial said in England v Australia:
@catogrande said in England v Australia:
@crucial said in England v Australia:
@antipodean said in England v Australia:
Sad reflection on World Rugby when Gardner is considered the best referee.
It all comes down to the process and the expectations that WR keep changing on these guys. I have some sympathy for AG as the refs still don't seem to be making decisions based on the same evidence everyone at home sees.
We don't like it when the TMO makes the decision, we don't like it if the ref makes a call without the TMO input and we don't like it when the ref ignores the TMO.
It is up to WR to stop fiddling with the process all the time but come up with a clear understandable way of reviewing decisions. Cricket managed to do it in a shorter period and now even if the decision is slightly debateable you know the process has been followed properly.This. Plus the refs never know when someone at World Rugby is going to publicly criticise their performance and tell everyone the ref got a crucial call wrong.
Again, it is the inconsistency that grates. Some decisions get commented on, others are treated like a state secret. It appears from the outside that it all depends on who your mates are.
I doubt anyone wants a post game post mortem but there are ways by which they can convey that they aim for perfection but accept that errors will happen.
WR could learn a lot from the big US sports. NFL has quick clear decisions that everyone accepts and moves on. Each week they release an Officiating Video to the media to explain big calls.
NBA also put up post game video reviews.
Rugby TV commentary teams could also learn a lot from the US guys who don't spent half their time winding up the audience with claims of poor decisions or 50/50 calls. They let the viewer do all that themselves without adding a form of confirmation or (Justin Marshall) adding their own interpretation of the laws into the mix.
The game has been pro for over 20 years but doesn't act like it sometimes.I just don't understand why commentators are allows to complain about the Laws as part of the broadcast. That's not what they are there for, you can do that sort of thing in a panel show.
Also, it should be a requirement for the commentators to do a refereeing course every year to keep their knowledge of the Laws up to date. Looking at you Justin Marshall.
Less important, but I think that the commentators need to realise that they are part of the promotion of the sport. The constant sniping and negativity must be turning people off. And people like Tony Johnson really need to reign in their bias of certain teams. He makes watching Auckland or the Blues a terrible experience (even when we are winning). That's the countries largest TV market, Sky should be more concerned about that.
It's notable that you get a local "expert" commentator all around the country except for Auckland games too.
-
@kirwan said in England v Australia:
I just don't understand why commentators are allows to complain about the Laws as part of the broadcast. That's not what they are there for, you can do that sort of thing in a panel show.
When I started reading this, I thought you were talking about Courtney Lawes, not The Laws. Although what you wrote would apply to the response to his decision!
Modern commentators are the new tabloid journalism - anything for a headline, as long as it supports your own team. Unfortunately, some people think they are still the newspapers of the pre-internet era; fair, respectful and balanced.
-
I watch, and read about, a wiiiide variety of sports. I don't know if there is any other sport that talks about referees, laws, and specific referee calls more than Rugby. Commentators, panel shows, dickheads on internet forums. Before and after.
Possibly Rugby League is worse, but it would be only just.
-
@mariner4life said in England v Australia:
Possibly Rugby League is worse, but it would be only just.
It is made worse by the fact that there are only about a dozen rules in their whole book.
And Gus Gould. He makes everything worse.
-
@nta said in England v Australia:
@mariner4life said in England v Australia:
Possibly Rugby League is worse, but it would be only just.
It is made worse by the fact that there are only about a dozen rules in their whole book.
And Gus Gould. He makes everything worse.
For them it starts with the losing coaches press conference, especially if they don't get at least 50% of the penalties. Shane Flanagan is the worst at the moment. But no one tops Toovey for that.
I think a big part of rugby's problem is the fact that there is a heap of broadcast time straight after a penalty. If it's in your own half, there is a minute or two of faffing about while the 10 kicks for touch, then another 30 seconds while the forwards lumber up for the lineout. That's a lot of time for 10 suuuuuper slow motion replays, and a mouth breather in the box to spout inaccurate bullshit.
-
-
@nta said in England v Australia:
@mariner4life said in England v Australia:
mouth breather in the box
yea that guy right there. But, he is faaaar from alone.
-
-
@nta said in England v Australia:
yea, but i am not sure people actually listen to him seriously any more do they? Now that Kafer has take up the same victim mentality, he is far more dangerous.
You'll probably mock me for this, but more dangerous to public opinion of refs are the super excitable Northern Hemisphere ones who are depserate to beat the All Blacks, so jump on every 50/50 and spout utter crap. The Irish dipshit on BeIn was deplorable this year, but he is far from alone there.
-
@mariner4life said in England v Australia:
yea, but i am not sure people actually listen to him seriously any more do they?
People aren't watching rugby. And he's only on Foxtel.
We get Gordon Bray and Matt Burke on Channel 10, which is so much b-
-
@nta said in England v Australia:
@mariner4life said in England v Australia:
yea, but i am not sure people actually listen to him seriously any more do they?
People aren't watching rugby. And he's only on Foxtel.
We get Gordon Bray and Matt Burke on Channel 10, which is so much b-
Bray isn't too bad in that respect is he (i don't watch on Ch10). I know, and am so disappointed by the fact, that Burke strays down that path.
Bray is too busy talking about where a player's family comes from, and which person he played U10s with, to have time to whinge about referee injustice.
-
@mariner4life said in England v Australia:
Bray isn't too bad in that respect is he (i don't watch on Ch10). I know, and am so disappointed by the fact, that Burke strays down that path.
Bray is too busy talking about where a player's family comes from, and which person he played U10s with, to have time to whinge about referee injustice.You are correct.
Burke is a fucking entitled private school boy whiner. His book is fairly boring but has a "Why didn't I stand up to getting shifted to centre when Mat Rogers came along? Waaaaaaaah!"
