Dual-referee system on the table for Super rugby

[Lee Grant]

Dual-referee system on the table for Super rugby
JOSH RAKIC
January 31, 2010


SUPER rugby could follow in the footsteps of the NRL and introduce a dual-referee system as soon as next year.

Australian Rugby Union boss John O'Neill, Australian Super franchises and players have been unanimous in their support of providing fans with a more attractive style of rugby in 2010. And should those efforts fail, national referees' coach Andrew Cole revealed a radical contingency plan had been hatched.

''Having two refs is certainly something we're thinking about,'' said Cole, a veteran referee of 31 Tests. ''It's been discussed. It's been trialled in lower grades in South Africa.

''We do watch a lot of other sport and other games and how the officials interact, and all that sort of stuff, and we are keeping a close eye on that development. At this stage it's something we're certainly keeping a close eye on. It's got some merit.''

The Super 14 has already introduced a new interpretation of breakdown laws for this season intended to reward the attacking team - defenders will be banned from interfering with the ball and forced to roll away, get to their feet and allow the tackled player to release the ball back to teammates.

And it is hoped the move will encourage attacking teams to better utilise the ball and reduce their heavy reliance on kicking to gain field position.

''[Introducing two refs] depends how the game goes this year with those new interpretations, I guess,'' Cole said. ''At this stage we're sticking with the breakdown adjustment but it [two refs] is definitely an option.

''I know it was trialled in Durban, but those things tend to need development. I think they found issues in that the game is complicated at the breakdown and therefore because there are so many offences that can occur that it could have refs on either side of the breakdown with different interpretations.

''Again, it's got some merit but at this stage it hasn't pushed forward beyond that.''

NRL television audiences, crowd figures and general interest boomed under the two-referee system's inaugural season in 2009, which allowed for a free-flowing, attacking style of football. Cole admitted that had sparked further interest among the rugby fraternity. In the meantime however, he also revealed referees had been instructed to heavily police offside players from kicks in 2009.

''They'll be cracking down on players advancing in front of the kicker and that's another thing that will hopefully open up a bit more space on the field,'' Cole said.

''The idea behind the breakdown interpretation is to make for more attractive rugby. That's the intention. It's the same idea behind the offside.

''The genesis of them was at the post-Super 14 review in August last year where there was a coach and referee representative from each of the three countries - Dave Nucifora represented Australia.

''What they've found is that referees have been too lax on players being offside and in front of the kicker, and therefore when the player receives the ball there's a straight line of defence in front of him. So he's first option, his only option really, is to kick it back.

''Whereas if we were harder on those players who were offside in front of the kicker, that would open up some more space and hopefully for some counter-attack.

''And I guess, that's an area where a second referee could be an advantage. At the moment we work with the referee and two assistants, so hopefully they will be helping with that sort of thing, but two refs is certainly something we're thinking about [if things don't work out as planned].''

 

[Lee Grant]

The first thing I thought about is how are they going to double the amount of referees in that time? The quality of refs isn't that great now but doubling them would dilute the quality further. I guess the counter argument would be that it would be easier for them with two on the park so they don't have to be that good.

But if they can get the supply of refs and pay the extra costs I'd like to see it trialled.

I'd rather there not be a reason to have two refs but we've talked about how referees have failed to keep up with the players since pro rugby started, for some time. The players are getting away with rugby murder and are slowing ruck ball down more and more as time goes by. Sometimes there is a crackdown which works for a while but coaches eventually find out ways for their defending players to get around constraints.

Changing laws and introducing ELVs has not worked. Even my personal ELV preference - the Free Kick sanctions did not work because referees did not use cards correctly in the 2008 and 2009 Super14 and thereby the ELV deservedly lost credence with the watching NH observers.

Maybe two referees for professional rugby matches is the way to go but to find out we have to give it a trial.

 

[Lee Grant]

PS - It will be good to have a referee on both sides of the scrum as one extra benefit. IMO refs don't stand enough on the defending loosehead side.

 

[Newb]

i'd like to see it given a go also. but i wonder how many of the "bad referee" incidents we've seen are from things not being seen properly and how many are from just plain ignorance. two refs will help with seeing things clearer, but if neither of them know what the fark they're looking at it won't help a bit.

but having each one with a different role could really help. like one focuses on the ruck while the other one looks for offsides. or each side of the scrum like LG said. things like positioning and the chase of a high ball too. too much interference is being done by teams on that. could be cleared up with this.

 

[TOCC]

its a double edged sword really, i mean on one hand it might help to clean up the rucks, but alternatively it could also lead to more penalties as they start to nitpick on the finer details.

 

[Lee Grant]

True - there are all kinds of negatives but like the ELVs it would be good to see in a trial.

One of have just thought of is doing it without the NH doing it when they start the 2011/12 season. We'd have the one hemisphere doing one thing and the other, another, which is not good in a RWC year.

I'ts probably best to wait until the 2012 Super15.

When and if the NH is required to trial the idea I can see the NH coaches squealing, though teams like Northampton and Irish will love it. The SH view that NH clubs don't like attacking rugby is exaggerated. They aren't all like Saracens; many of them like to attack using the ball but oftentimes they don't have the forwards to lay down a platform for it - and in December and January weather and ground conditions are often not conducive to open play anyway.


PS - when I mentioned that the S14 refs would have to be doubled I meant refs on the FoP. I guess that using some of the present S14 ARs who haven't been out in the middle before could be matched with an old S14 hand on the FoP - and lesser refs could emerge to be ARs on the touchline before their time as it stands now.

Maybe it won't be such a big problem as I indicated.

 

[RugbyFuture]

its called a touch ref

 

[Biffo]

A few years ago I was very much in favour of two referees on the field and had the fortune to be able to ask a S12 referee of the time what he thought. He was totally opposed saying all it would achieve would be "having two dickheads on the field instead of one".

I remain very pro a serious trial. Works in other sports.

 

[Lee Grant]

Whilst there is no comparison between what goes on in what is called a league ruck and a union ruck or tackle (ruckle), the league 'ruck' has been cleaned up with the 2nd ref. Teams with forwards skilled at slowing down the league ruck were scathing at first with "it's a man's game" type comments but by the end of the season the consensus was that the game was sped up and 2 refs was a good thing.

By itself, speeding up the rugby union game, is not the holy grail for me. Slower games where good tight forward work, including mauling and pick and drives etc and challenging set pieces, have their place and a hard game of that type from both sides can be enthralling - so long as there aren't too many of them.

What gets up my nose is when a team that does have good attacking backs and wants to use them is disadvantaged by defenders illegally slowing the ball down and getting away scot-free time and time again.

If the 2 union refs can take out the sly infractions from the ruckle as the league refs did in their ruck, it may be happy days.

As always - sounds good, feels good looks good.

 

[chief]

Very interested to see what Lindommer has to say about this. I'm all for it, obviously you would need a Senior Referee, and a kind of junior referee. Both would judge the break down. I think they could get in the way of players a bit too much though, but it would take the pressure off the referees.

I think another kind of idea, to have the 3rd ruck offense and your out. To keep it fair and consistent every time a player is pinged there is a 4/5 official recording number of the player guilty of the offense, and they could be able to communicate to the referee. I think Brisbane Premier Rugby's pre-season should give it a go, as should NSW's and Perth's. Find the flaws, as well as the positives and negatives.

 

[TOCC]

Very interested to see what Lindommer has to say about this. I'm all for it, obviously you would need a Senior Referee, and a kind of junior referee. Both would judge the break down. I think they could get in the way of players a bit too much though, but it would take the pressure off the referees.

I think another kind of idea, to have the 3rd ruck offense and your out. To keep it fair and consistent every time a player is pinged there is a 4/5 official recording number of the player guilty of the offense, and they could be able to communicate to the referee. I think Brisbane Premier Rugby's pre-season should give it a go, as should NSW's and Perth's. Find the flaws, as well as the positives and negatives.

but its pretty hard to identify the actual person guilty, even in international matches you see refs penalising the wrong person continually

 

[Pfitzy]

I don't mind if initially there are more penalties - in fact I think that's nearly guaranteed.

But the referees need to whip out the yellow cards, because otherwise players will still do it if the punishment is only up to 3 points.

 

[chief]

This could all be avoided if a) AR's get involved more, even the TMO's b) more frequent whipping out of cards. 3rd offense and your gone buddy.

 

[liquor box]

I have supported a second ref at the scrum, but can see a downside when you have a second ref at a lineout, will they become really anal about a throw not being straight?

Also if the game is played faster will we see more "injuries" among big forwards to slow the game, or the ball remaining at the back of a ruck to allow for a breather?

 

[PaarlBok]

Maties plays two refs now for longer then a decade in their koshuis league with great success. The Stormers vs Sharks match with the ref doing the TMO job worked pretty well I thought. Hope they'll pull this one through.

 

[PaarlBok]

You cant say Oom PB dont know his stuff.

Rugby 365

Two refs ... a South African invention
Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:08

The Australians are making a big fuss about the possible introduction of a two-referee system in Super Rugby, but it is a systems that has long been in use in South Africa.

Andrew Cole, the former Test referee who is now the national referees' coach in Australia, has been quoted on RugbyHeaven as saying that it could be introduced "as soon as next year".

However, it has been used, trialled and refined in certain domestic league in South Africa - with mixed reaction to the 'experiment'.

Australian Super 14 teams, facing falling spectator numbers, have pledged themselves to brighter rugby and using two referees may be used to facilitate this, according to Cole.

Cole is quoted as saying: ''[Introducing two referees] depends how the game goes this year with those new interpretations [of the tackle law], I guess. At this stage we're sticking with the breakdown adjustment but it [two referees] is definitely an option.

''I know it was trialled in Durban, but those things tend to need development. I think they found issues in that the game is complicated at the breakdown and therefore because there are so many offences that can occur that it could have refs on either side of the breakdown with different interpretations.

''Again, it's got some merit but at this stage it hasn't pushed forward beyond that.''

The two referee system was developed and used in the strong koshuis (residence) competition at Stellenbosch University and refined considerably at the suggestion of Dr Craven and under the watchful eye of Professor Justus Potgieter of the faculty of Human Movement Science.

Potgieter, himself a provincial referee, involved several top referees in the project. Wynand Mans, the former Springbok player and at the time one of South Africa's top referees, became a great proponent of using two referees.

The International Rugby Board gave permission for the experiment to go ahead. It was used in the club competitions in Western Province and is still used in the intense koshuis rugby at Stellenbosch. According to Potgieter the players are annoyed if only one referee arrives for their matches.

At an invitation from Northern Transvaal (now Blue Bulls) Mans went to Loftus Versfeld where he and Albert Adams, a Test referee, refereed an Under-20 provincial match. Mans says that the experiment was a huge success.

Positives

The system was refined at Stellenbosch and Potgieter and Mans drew up methodology for the use of two referees. Potgieter and Dr Bokkie Blaauw of Stellenbosch University monitored the use of two referees at Stellenbosch and found that there were fewer penalties, more playing time and fewer injuries.

Potgieter says: "I'd rather referee on my own; it's more of a challenge and you move around more, but using two referees is better for the game. It may, of course, not be as appealing to a young, prospective referee."

In 1995 IRB officials watched a match at Stellenbosch refereed by two referees and were not impressed. Using two referees petered out for lack of interest overseas and limited support in South Africa's. Those who tried it were enthusiastic; those who did not try it poohpoohed the idea.

The two referees would act in concertina up and down the field in such a way that the players were almost all between them. Where there was a concentration of players - scrums, line-outs, rucks, mauls tackles - the referee on whose side it was would go in close while his partner went wide. The referee in close was in a position to watch the concentrated phase of play with full intent while his partner went wide to monitor the offside lines. Picking up offside at kicks was also easier. When play went into in-goal, one would speed into the in-goal while the other kept an eye on what was happening in the field of play.

Mans believed that it was a simple workable system. It was easy to explain its practical implementation.

What happened if there was disagreement?

Mans said that that did not present a problem as the referees could swiftly consult and the principle of first infringement would apply.

One of the 1990s' objections was the expense - two referees instead of one. Since then the referees' squad has grown. In experiments Potgieter and Mans found that it was quite possible to do away with touch judges as it was easy for two referees to keep an eye on the touch-line.

One of the advantages of having two referees is that it reduces the pressure on one man and the tendency to blame him.

One of the arguments for the introduction was the number officials used in other, less complicated games.

We asked some leading referees and give their reactions.

For:

Jonathan Kaplan: "I am in favour. I was one of the first to try it ( in 1990 when I was with the Western Province Referees' Society ) and I think it is a great initiative! I would happily take part in the experiment, and ultimately I think this should be judged by our customers - the players, coaches and spectators - in conjunction with the referees."

Against:

André Watson: "I am not in favour of two referees. The rumour is faint one and I would not pay too much attention at this time."

Nigel Owens: "I am against two referees. I don't think there is anything wrong with it as it is now."

Mark Lawrence: "Willie Roos and I did the two-referee system on an annual basis for the Ermelo High School Alumni vs Impalas. Feelings were mixed. Some players felt it inhibiting and couldn't give their all, and so they stuck to the law! While others felt it slowed the game down. The reason was that the penalty count was higher. Occasionally, Willie and I, simultaneously, awarded penalties in opposite directions. We then awarded a scrum to the team going forward.

"I felt it gave us more control and we were intimidated less and that we almost out-numbered the players, if you know what I mean. Could take a lot of pressure off the referees.

"For me, refereeing is a skill, encompassing man management skills, and an art to be able to judge materiality and advantage. These are lost with two referees. And you cannot teach an old dog new tricks!"

Marius Jonker: "The fact that SANZAR is considering two referees per game comes as a surprise.

"I am certainly not enthusiastic about the thought at all. Referees are individuals and have different refereeing styles and abilities that they bring to the game. Having two referees per game could create inconsistencies within games. I guess the reason this is being looked at is the fact that the modern game is played at a ferocious pace and many believe that having two referees will eliminate referee mistakes.

"I can think of other ways to assist referees in making lesser mistakes.........like expanding TMO input."

Craig Joubert: "Personally not a fan of two referees. My feeling is that rugby is such a dynamic game that it takes a tremendous amount of application to ensure consistency for 80 minutes from one guy in the middle. Trying to coordinate consistency from two guys with the whistle in such a dynamic environment is a challenge I'm not convinced can be easily met. Certainly the manner in which I've been involved in a dual referee experiment would need refining and the roles to be clearly defined.

"Having said that I'm open to having my mind changed...."

Undecided:

Stuart Dickinson: "I haven't heard a thing about this and so can't really help."

Freek Burger: "I agree with the principle but am not convinced that it will work in practice.

"My proposal is still to give assistant referees the powers of a second referee. They are involved with pointing out foul play but waste their time on the sidelines with their primary functions. Get them involved on the other side of scrums, for example, and they can make a worthwhile contribution."

Wynand Mans , a Paarl Gym legend.

 

[PaarlBok]

Well the ref acting as TMO trial one on Newlands was a big success. used twice on saturday and that should allow the budget to get two on the pitch then.

 

[Lee Grant]

You certainly know your stuff Oom - thanks for posting that article.


Mark Lawrence: "Willie Roos and I did the two-referee system on an annual basis for the Ermelo High School Alumni vs Impalas. Feelings were mixed. Some players felt it inhibiting and couldn't give their all, and so they stuck to the law!

Sticking to the law is an interesting concept that would tend to be of interest to people, like yours truly, who think not doing so, and getting away with it too often, is spoiling our game.



Freek Burger: "My proposal is still to give assistant referees the powers of a second referee. They are involved with pointing out foul play but waste their time on the sidelines with their primary functions. Get them involved on the other side of scrums, for example, and they can make a worthwhile contribution."

Another good idea discussed by yours truly and many others.



At least there is a bit of talk about something new and evidence of a conciousness that something else has to be trialled - even if it is to see that it didn't work..