It was about Phipps and Messam going at each other. Did you hear Hooper's responce?
CJ "Do you want to start acting like a captain?"
MH "Do you want to start refereeing the breakdown?" Or something along those lines.
Really? He said that? That is completely out of order for any captain; he's got a 7 on his back, not a 9!
Hell, I would have marched him 10 metres for that sort of dissent, with a warning that more of the same would be having him sitting in a plastic chair for 10 minutes
Menace, I don't think CJs comment was one of 'do your job better', it was, as described above, a reminder that he is captain and expected to uphold a standard which he had overstepped. CJ was basically saying that "if you want to deal with me as captain you need to act like one". Joining a skirmish and swearing at the opposition is not the standard expected.
Let's back up a bit. There's 2 behavioural issues that seemed to be morphed together and others have twisted what I was suggesting.
1) Hooper's minor verbal with Messam, and
2) Hoopers alleged retort to CJ
In terms of 1), I have no issue at all with CJ chatting to Hooper about his verbal stouche with Messam and that he shouldn't be doing it neither as a player nor capt. Admittedly I see it only fairly minor thing in a big boys game and happens all the time...a simple 'feck off' happens all the time, but fair enough to put a lid on it. I do the same in my games.
In regards to 2), what I found unnecessary was CJs choice of words to Hooper, and forgive me but I think there is no way you can say "do you want to start acting like a captain!" without sounding condescending and equally I also see that as another way of saying 'you need to do your job better'. He is basically saying, you're not acting like a captain and you should, so do your job better. And in front of some of his players has undermined and questioned Hoopers authority. To me it wasn't 'just a reminder', as I just find that as quite an antagonistic phrase to try and get compliance or make a point. You don't think it is and that's fine. But based on CJs comment I could understand Hoopers response.
Ian_c then suggested because of that retort Hooper should have been marched 10/penalised and I was merely suggesting that that would look jobsworth because as I saw it CJ fired the first barb and got one back in return so it would look petty if he then went on to pk or YC Hooper to show that he could win the pissing contest.
Perhaps even CJ realised it and probably that's why he didn't do anything further? Who knows?:shrug:
I think you just tread a fine line when you openly question how a captain is doing their job in that manner, as the natural instinct is for them is to then question yours. I just think with CJs experience that there were better words he could have used. I personally think CJ said the wrong thing and got a response to match. I'm not saying it's right, just that I can understand it.
Hey, I'm no expert in use of the English language as there's been too many times that I've said things to the captain that drew a barbed response only to realise I'd probably deserved it. There's an art to communication and CJ is usually very good, but I found his phrase unusual and surprising for him, and it's one that I won't be using.
I can understand why many disagree with me, I just viewed that incident from a human perspective not a referee vs player, where common decency by being respectful both ways should have been maintained. I tend to view that the referee is equal with the player and doesn't reside on a pedestal. (Maybe I'm wrong on that thinking??)
