Thanks M.O.T.H. - you live and learn as I didn't know how the referees allocation worked for senior teams. I was a little worried with how 16As were refereed and thought the same applied to the more senior teams.
Having lived through the progression from under 6 soccer through to senior schoolboy representative rugby (with a number of sports in between) referee's (umpires what ever you may call them) are always between a rock and a hard place from the onset. As it will always be difficult to comprehend some calls now and then, I don't think (in any of the amateur sports I have been associated with - and rugby does not hold the title for "shockers" ). Referees have never received enough support from the sporting community (and the sport executives) in general.
The administrative approach (reinforcement of laws and regulations as they are highlighted and dictated from time to time) maybe part of the solution - however sometimes this results in some in referees being perceived (incorrectly) as "protected species" - where one can complain and there may be a process to follow for a grievance - but often seen as a waste of time as more than not, there is little or no feedback or response. Or a blunt "that is the way it is.
Sorry that is the way it was - transparency is a good thing. Explanation on and off the field are the most fundamental of expectations by all associated with whatever sport nowadays.
Successful industries are full of excellent continuous improvement programs easily adapted to the management of all sports. Time for some change, to provide further support and assistance for the "whistle blowers". Which would include increased peer review, assessment and ongoing regular certification (credentialing) for competency and capability, Individual performance plans, issue escalation protocols, mentors etc, etc. These all may exist. Definitely need some further investment though - as it is very clear - there is great potential for continued improvement.
