Why refs give the Pumas an uneven break
It is quite amazing that the IRB still permits referees to conduct tutorials during international rugby matches. The refs jabber on incessantly, telling players to release, roll away, get onside, wash the dishes, pick up the kids from school. But such a stream of communication creates a clear inequity that the IRB seems willfully oblivious to.
English speaking nations have a clear advantage over those countries for whom English is a second or third language. The players of the English speaking nations pick up the instructions instantly and react far more quickly. The players from France, Argentina, Italy and the rest are often a beat behind, and frequently get penalised for not reacting quickly enough.
And I suspect the problem goes even deeper than obvious levels of communication on the field. Many of the top refs have clearly developed “relationships” with certain players over the years. In the Southern Hemisphere they have reffed them on a constant basis in the Super 15 and have spoken with them at many an informal function.
It is human nature to favour these players subconsciously, and it has certainly shown throughout the Rugby Championship. We saw it when Italy came into the Six Nations and now we are seeing it with Argentina. The ‘smaller’, non English-speaking nations are discriminated against.
Argentina would have beaten South Africa in their first home match if referee Steve Walsh had handled the second half equably. But every time the Boks got in the Puma’s half, he pinged the home side for a penalty. Yet when the Pumas had a period of what should have been decisive pressure, Walsh hardly lifted a finger.
The Boks offended on multiple occasions in order to hold their line. They were offside, they made several illegal tackles without the use of the arms, they pulled down rolling mauls. They should have had at least one player in the bin. But Walsh was blind to it all.
Amazingly he was not the worst offender. If I were a member of Argentina’s rugby board, I would have made a formal complaint against Jaco Peyper after his handling of the All Blacks game in Argentina.
He ignored a couple of blatant knock-ons by the Blacks, one of which led indirectly to a try. And he kept pinging Pumas forwards, on their feet, after release, trying to turn over possession. Only Peyper will know why he did not pull up New Zealand for not releasing, but subconsciously he must be aware that New Zealand is a mighty nation when it comes to determining a ref’s professional future.
A strength of Argentina’s game is the driving maul, yet teams keep offending against them with impunity. Against the Blacks about three Argentina forwards appealed in disbelief as Richie McCaw was allowed to come in at the side and disrupt. With an even-handed ref, the scoreline would have remained close until halftime. But with Peyper in charge, Argentina had already been blown away.
Another frequent occurrence in these matches is the tendency of refs to hand a yellow card to the ‘smaller’ team far more readily than they do to the ‘bigger’ nations. Against Australia at the weekend, Argentina were again the victims.
It was just 25 minutes before Patricio Albacete received a yellow card. As it happened two Aussies offended at the breakdown before Albacete. Digby Ioane was holding onto the ball and playing it on the ground and the Aussie tighthead prop rolled in from the side like a barrel in order to knock Albacete away. But off the big Argentinian lock went. The Pumas were already on a warning and Joubert was going to have his pound of flesh.
The Aussies were also warned soon after. But they committed multiple offences in defence of their line at one point of the second half and no yellow card was issued. It was not until the 74th minute, with the match almost over, that Craig Joubert finally decided to act.
I am not sure that refs discriminate knowingly, but it cannot help impartiality when the refs see a selection panel with both a Kiwi and a South African on it, but no Argentine. Surely all first tier nations should be represented (defined by all the qualifiers for the previous World Cup).
Now that we have a Frenchman in charge of the elite referees, hopefully the concept of egalite will be given a bit more credence. It is not good enough for a small group of elite nations to provide and judge all the refs amongst themselves. Until rugby’s referees can approach the universality of soccer’s, we will continue to get unacceptable discrimination against teams like of Argentina.
Posted under News & Opinions
7 months ago
Fair comment on the language disadvantage but the worst ref performance of the Championship was SA v NZ last weekend. The ref must have been on a promise of a gold watch from South Africa to have had such a one sided penalty count (especially in the first half).
7 months ago
MR is right about the SH refs clearly having a cosy relationship with the players from the Super 15. It shows up in their reffing. In the Summer Wales were penalised 26-12 against in the final two Tests against Australia in matches they lost by a total of three points. It’s because of over-familiarity and the subconscious wish to maintain the status quo.
The pen count in the first half of SA-NZ may have been lopsided, but at least Alain Rolland is the one ref who doesn’t bend to homerism consistently. Look up the IRB stats when he’s the ref. Joubert on the other hand does bend noticeably.
7 months ago
Well said Mark. I’ve often wondered if the French reputation for ill-discipline was casued in part by the fact that referees (apart from Rolland) make no attempt to talk to them in their own language. The referees panel should insist that anybody refereeing these teams should have basic conversational skills in the relevant language
7 months ago
The language “disadvantage” is completely irrelevant. All those players (as well as Italians) don’t play in their home country or Spanish/Italian speaking country, but evolve in the French Top14 or the Aviva Premiership. Moreover, they participate in the HCup and Challenge. They are first and foremost professionals, and they clearly understand what is going on. What they have to do is “clean up” the image they’ve been building up over the last years: a team doing everything in its power to slow down all rucks, laying on the ball, not rolling away, etc… A team whose focused is to “destroy” the attacking spirit. So have the refs been harsh on them? I do believe so as well, and hopefully the refs will work on improving their own performance, but Argentina also needs to clean up its act.
7 months ago
I totally agree with Joel Bonnaud. In the first place, there is one set of laws by which the game is governed. These laws are printed in all of the international languages and the players are (or should be) familiar with those laws. For example, everyone knows you must roll away frome the tackle and if you don’t, and the ref notices it, a penalty ensues, so maybe the players need to read the laws in their respective language if that’s the problem. As for singling out France and Argentina, I haven’t noticed that to be a problem. I’m not sure what percentage of the Springboks, for example, don’t speak English, but there used to be a joke about the Blue Bulls having to hire 5 players who spoke english (the Bulls supplying the lion’s share of the Boks for a few years). There has always been at least one english-speaking player on each team who can translate if needed. Yes, there are questionable refs (can you say ‘Bryce Lawerence?) but they are not the norm, thank god. The players are grown men; they don’t need to have an offical on the pitch holding their hands and treating them as if they were grade school children just learning to play. So what if the ref ‘knows’ the players off the pitch? If they happen to be at an event or party or even a pub together, they should ignore each other because there might be a question next time the ref refs a game? Personally, I LIKE to hear a ref call a player by name rather than ‘roll away number 6’. Argentina is in the ‘big league’ now and if they are going to continue to play with the big dogs, they need to ‘grow a set’ and stop whining.
7 months ago
@ Jim Holomon:
Reference your last comment (last sentence), I think you will find that its not the Argies that are whining, its a point that Mark Reason thinks is an issue hence highlighting it. I guess it needs to be made clear that this is the author’s perception and not something that has been raised by the Pumas officials; unless Mark knows something we don’t. I even trolled through Argentinian online media (and rugby) sites to check. I am an ABs fan but do admire the way Argies went about their business this year especially their reactions to the refs decisions during their games. And when F.Lobbe, their captain got interviewed, at no point did he allude to refreeing as an issue.
7 months ago
rugby a great space with lots info and much visited as http://www.facebook.com/Juan.Casajus.Rugby maybe it can translate into Spanish. very good concepts and the conception and spirit of the game between the southern and northern hemisphere, greetings.
7 months ago
My first comment. I was interested to reinforce Mark Reason article about smaller and bigger nations treatment, since I ´ ve been player for 20 years and referee for another 20 and still running the first division in Argentina. I saw all matches and cant agree more with him. Disappointedly, astonished and flabbergasted to appreciate that in order to register myself in the site, I found a clear discrimination among smaller and bigger countries! It seems that Mark need no further support.
7 months ago
For all those ignorants who really think that referees are FAIR in international rugby matches please take the time to watch Argentinas matches in the rugby championship and please stare at the enormous differences the referee does at judging, it was really unpleasant to watch the pumas matches knowing that if referees have been more professionals the result in the respective matches would have been different and the pumas performance will clearly been other.
7 months ago
You play to the whistle. South Africans know Steve Walsh from SR and other internationals and have a idea more or less what his interpretation are. Argentina on the other hand have not adapted to the interpretation of the referee and I think its a valuable lesson that they have learned and will be back with more experience in that field. Also the legs of the old guard was getting tired and you will notice they lost most of their matches in the last 30 or 20 when the legs seems to get tired and the defense starts to become desperate. Against NZ and Australia they were running low on petrol.
7 months ago
I repeat please watch the matches and you will see , interpretation of the players to the referee is another aspect as what the referee judges in the field, charging inexistent penalties.The Pumas are clearly not benefited with referees decisions in the field otherwise results in rugby ch would have been different.Please inform yourself before discussing and watch the matches
11
Comments