‘Teams want best refs’
Jonathan Kaplan says the coaches and players have opposed the system of selecting neutral referees.
A nerve has been struck with regards to the selection of referees. After the Waratahs’ win over the Sharks last Saturday, there was an outcry of Australian match official Paul Marks.
Firstly, Marks did not award the Sharks – the away team – a penalty try when fullback Kurtley Beale deliberately knocked-on a pass that would’ve given Ryan Kankowski a clear run for the winning score. The Sharks then kicked for the corner but Marks penalised them for obstruction at the resulting lineout.
Sharks head coach John Plumtree has asked Sanzar to review Marks’ performance while the Australian media has quoted skipper John Smit saying his team ‘didn’t get the rub of the green from the referee’.
Kaplan, however, believes this situation has been blown out of context.
‘I think this whole situation has been taken in the wrong way by the Australian media. I don’t believe Smit and Plumtree had a problem with the fact that Marks was an Australian referee. I think their criticism was made in general circumstances,’ Kaplan told keo.co.za.
‘The thing is that the coaches and players have asked for referees to be selected on merit and not on a neutral basis. They want the best referees for the Super Rugby games and we gave them this.’
Kaplan added that referees are also due bad performances.
‘If a neutral referee had to make those decisions in the Sharks’ game, there would be no criticism of not having neutral referees. Then the argument would have been that the ref made poor decisions,’ he said.
‘But just like players and coaches have poor games on the field, the referees also make bad calls sometimes.’
After four weeks of the new law interpretations, Kaplan said he is in favour of them.
‘With these various tweaks in the application of the law, attacking rugby has flourished. In the past, the defending teams were favoured too much. But things have balanced out. Instead of the constant kick-chase method being used, teams are encouraged to keep the ball in hand.’
Kaplan did, however, add that it will take more time for these law interpretations to be established.
‘This system is a product still in process. It’s still too short to say that everything is perfect now, it will take more time for players, coaches and referees to get this is into their system. Every week, referees are communicating with teams after matches to discuss various decisions and situations, so everything will get better.’
With the World Cup coming up, a question of which laws will be implemented comes to mind. But Kaplan believes this will be sorted out soon.
‘Remember, the laws haven’t changed. It’s just the matter of interpretation,’ he said. ‘I still speak the same rugby language whether I’m reffing a Six Nations match or Super 14 game.
‘Obviously some things will need to be refined. I believe scrums and the engagement will be some of the areas reviewed. There are far too many penalties being awarded at the scrum in the Super 14.’
By Gareth Duncan
March 10th, 2010 at 11:53 pm
I would hate to think refs are bias, i tend to think they are more likely to be swayed by home crowds such as at loftus and and Christchurch. I think they can be bias towards good players as well such as McCaw. For example if a winger is trying to counter ruck hell be penalised but if its a guy who is good at it he’ll be let go.
I would like to think that bias refs are are thing of the past – im talking about the bias priks who use to ref All Black Spingbok games in the republic 30 years ago. Yeah you might call them great but they favoured you guys blatently. In todays game that is not the case – like cricket umpires, some refs tend to have brain explosions from time to time.
You saffas have been complaining about the ref alot lately, i think the sharks deserve the critisim themselves without lookin to the ref as a scapegoat. They are awful this year. There performances at home looked like they will still on holiday!
March 11th, 2010 at 12:03 am
Super 14
Referee Paul Marks sacked after New South Wales controversy: reports
March 11, 2010
Referee Paul Marks has paid a high price for his controversial decision not to award the Sharks a penalty try in their Super 14 loss to NSW last Saturday night.
The Australian newspaper reports that Marks has been sacked indefinitely, with SANZAR referees boss Lyndon Bray conceding a penalty try against Waratah Kurtley Beale should have been awarded to the visiting South African side.
The decision to stand down Marks comes after Sharks coach John Plumtree and his players voiced their dismay at the officiating after their 25-21 loss to the Waratahs, their fourth successive loss of 2010.
AAP
March 11th, 2010 at 12:09 am
@NZMaori: ag whatever man.
funny how you kiwis always talk about refs 30 yrs ago but scream blue murder when we complain about the present.
marks has been punished, and not by a saffa.
nuff said.
March 11th, 2010 at 12:40 am
Yes but but, there was no guarantee the Ryann Kankowski would have caught the ball..and how is this different from when one of the All Black players punched the ball out of the arms of a Bok at the Las Vegas Sevens after he crossed the try line..and not penalized at all, and knocking SA out of the cup..
March 11th, 2010 at 12:55 am
Rugby law Book:
“B. Penalty Try
A penalty try shall be awarded between the posts if but for foul play by the defending team
* a try would PROBABLY have been scored, or
* it would probably have been scored in a more favorable position than that where the ball was grounded.”
But what makes a knock on foul play even if deliberate??
“LAW 17. KNOCK-ON OR THROW-FORWARD
A knock-on occurs when the ball travels forward towards the direction of the opponents’ dead-ball line after:-
* a player loses possession of it, or
* a player propels or strikes it with his hand or arm, or
* it strikes a player’s hand or arm and touches the ground or another player before it is recovered by the player.
A throw-forward occurs when a player carrying the ball throws or passes it in the direction of his opponents’ dead-ball line. A throw-in from touch is not a throw-forward. If the ball is not thrown or passed forward but it bounces forward after hitting a player or the ground, it is not a throw-forward.
Note:-
(i)
A pass, throw or knock-on should not be adjudged an infringement unless it is clearly so under the Law. If there is any doubt, play should be allowed to proceed.
(1)
The knock-on or throw-forward must not be intentional.
Penalty:- Free kick at the place of infringement or in accord with
Law 14 Penalty (e). A penalty try may be awarded.”
Yup Marks cannot read the Rugby Law Book. Voertsek!
March 11th, 2010 at 1:20 am
He must be a Marksist
March 12th, 2010 at 2:41 am
@NZMaori: @251 Funny your comments about the SA ref’s – we were cheated out of a series win in NZ a few times by dubious decisions as well.
So perhaps you should take your self righteous attitude and stuff it where the sun dont shine, because your nation was just as guilty of it. It worked both ways, and all of the incidents left bad taste in both parties mouths, and sullied the game not true?
And OPEN YOUR EYES – you must want to look before you can see- because its bad for the game, and we care most of all for the game, not the result. How much more blatant/inept can the last weeks reffing be? FFS! Hell!
Re the Lions/Brumbies game:
Is it good for the game that either:
- the ref does not know the laws on double movement on the line, or
- chooses not to apply them?
Is it good for the game that either:
-the ref’s ego is so big that he chooses to apply laws that have no basis in the game to penalise team because he is frustrated, or
– he is so biased that he chooses to ignore his own commands at the scrums (“its out, use it”) and award a penalty try for nothing?
Re the Sharks /Tahs game:
Is it good that the ref either:
- does not know the laws on penalty tries, or
- knows them but chooses not to appply them -in direct contravention of his own rulings?
Either way you look at it, how is this good for the game? Surely you cannot support this kind of behaviour if you have any sense appreciation for the game?
March 12th, 2010 at 2:43 am
This is not an “us and them” ***** session in good nature – this is a reflection on the SHAMEFUL state of our game (either way you look at it).