I saw on Facebook yesterday that someone had gone to the
trouble to note the exact times, minute and second, of the incorrect decisions made
by Jerome Garces that disadvantaged the Springboks in the World Cup game against
New Zealand on Saturday. He even supported his claims with clips from the game
and he was right, right and right. The French ref, as we all suspected, is perfectly
capable of seeing some things, while missing others.
That’s a bit obsessive, and typical of a fan who doesn’t want
to accept that his team has been beaten, but it’s pretty good research.
There was no record of Garces’ decisions that went our way, costing
the All Blacks and, of course a poor referee will make mistakes both ways. And
that’s what Graces is, a poor referee who should never be allowed to appear at
this level and yet, amazingly, he is clearly highly rated by the powers that be
and is often given the biggest games.
I don’t go with those who call him biased – that would
surely have been picked up by now. These matches are reviewed and dissected by
the referee bosses and they wouldn’t allow it, although they don’t seem to mind
some pretty basic errors of law, interpretation and eye sight.
I’ve spoken to one or two international referees in other
sports and I’ve been told that at the Olympics, for example, a referee who makes
a mistake on the laws gets sent home without officiating another game.
World Rugby have made it difficult for their referees by
adding protocols, directives and interpretations to the laws. Those, surely, are
now part of the laws and what happens in other games should apply. Sure, the
referee can’t see everything but he should, especially now that the assistant referees have executive powers and there’s a TMO with the power of the slow motion replay. Please don’t appoint people who
miss what’s going on.
Don’t make excuses for them – if they, between them, miss
for example, Kieran Reid pulling back Du Toit at the lineout, send the whole bunch
packing. The non-debatable principle is that the players have the right to have
their game fairly and competently adjudicated. Anyone who prevents that from
happening should not be there.
The late Norman McFarland, one of the sharpest rugby brains
I ever met, used to compare a rugby game to a human personality. Events and occurrences
early on influence how it develops later and it can change direction completely
because of something that happens at any stage. He was fiercely critical of
referees – I was on the receiving end once or twice – and that was precisely because
of the effect an incorrect decision can have on the rest of the game.
It’s not as simple as keeping a tally of the points scored
as the result of errors. It’s far more complex than that.
That’s why I don’t go along with those who say things like “Ja,
the referee was poor but we would have lost anyway because we played badly.” In
any game there are things that you can control and things that you can’t. You
can’t control the weather, you can’t control how well the opponents play and,
yes, you can’t control the referee and you have to adjust your play to fit in
with the way he is blowing. But you do have the right to insist that he knows
and applies the law consistently and that he doesn’t miss the obvious.
The players and coaches are the ones who really count here.
Why not give them a say. They can’t decide who gets to ref them, I agree, but if
they can show, with evidence of the kind that I saw on Facebook, that the
referee can’t do the job, they should see him get sent home and
never meet him on the field again.
No comments:
Post a Comment