Dedicated AR's?

[Constantine]

There was a point of discussion at the refs meeting last Monday about having refs train as dedicated AR's. So rather then have refs chopping and changing between two different skill sets, there'd be AR's who were able to focus more on the skills they need to run the line.

Also, the idea of having full-time (as it were) TO3's - two AR's and a ref who always work together. They'd have their calls sorted out, know each others skills and expectations, be able to communicate much better than currently.

Personally, I like the idea - partly because I love ARing just as much as being out in the middle, and partly because of the very self-serving notion that the IRB would be much more willing to let a woman AR men's games than referee.
There are a couple of guys around my age in the WRRA who I reckon if we worked together for the next half-dozen years we'd be a bloody good unit.

What are other people's thoughts?

 

[Mike Whittaker]

Sounds like there could be advantages in teams of 3 getting to know each other well. But are all 3 always going to be available? How well will a stranger fit in with the other 2 if 1 is off injured? Is it not good experience to work with other officials? Pros and cons I reckon...

And it is nice to meet different people

 

[Ian_Cook]

I think a far better idea at elite level anyway would be to have a TO4's selected together and officiating together. They would travel and operate a team is the same way that players do. Referees would rotate their roles as Referee, AR1, AR2 and Sideline Sam. A less experienced referee could then introduced into the TO4 as the "fifth wheel" travelling but not officiating unless the TO4 was appointed to a relatively minor fixture.

Players are selected in teams, why not referees?

 

[Leeedwards22]

I think it is a very good idea to have dedicated TO3 who travel round together, that way they get to know each other and learn how each other officiates. rather than constantly changing, and have no bond between the team.

 

[Dickie E]

I think a far better idea at elite level anyway would be to have a TO4's selected together and officiating together. They would travel and operate a team is the same way that players do. Referees would rotate their roles as Referee, AR1, AR2 and Sideline Sam. A less experienced referee could then introduced into the TO4 as the "fifth wheel" travelling but not officiating unless the TO4 was appointed to a relatively minor fixture.

Players are selected in teams, why not referees?

Ok - Lets consider an example. We had in Melb on Thursday Bryce L., Andrew Lees and James Leckie. Would you see them as a rotating partnership?

 

[Dixie]

There was a point of discussion at the refs meeting last Monday about having refs train as dedicated AR's. So rather then have refs chopping and changing between two different skill sets, there'd be AR's who were able to focus more on the skills they need to run the line.

The discussion so far has been around the To3 being a constant unit, but I think this idea of dedicated ARs is both more uncontroversial and much more common. In the UK national leagues and the Premiership, there are at least twice as many dedicated ARs as there are refs.

You are right; they are totally different skill-sets. And a top performer at AR is quite likely not of a high enough standard at Ref to be considered for a starting spot - though AR1 obviously has to be good enough to step into the middle in extremis. My stints as #4 at National League 3 persuade me that an AR's occupational lifespan exceeds that of a referee - while the occasional ref continues to meet the standard in their mid-to-late 40's, there seem to be far more ARs of that age group with huge experience, able to use that experience to support a young up-and-coming ref without any sense of doing down their own competitive self-interest.

I think dedicated ARs above a certain level should be a given. In other words, I'm surprised that they don't already exist in Wellington.

 

[OB..]

Dixie sums it up well for England.

A point worth making is that at the top level there are relatively few referees and ARs, so over the course of a season (or more) they will work together more than once even with random selection. It is surely better to have a referee used to working with a number of ARs than restricted to a fixed To3.

 

[bignij]

The discussion so far has been around the To3 being a constant unit, but I think this idea of dedicated ARs is both more uncontroversial and much more common. In the UK national leagues and the Premiership, there are at least twice as many dedicated ARs as there are refs.

You are right; they are totally different skill-sets. And a top performer at AR is quite likely not of a high enough standard at Ref to be considered for a starting spot - though AR1 obviously has to be good enough to step into the middle in extremis. My stints as #4 at National League 3 persuade me that an AR's occupational lifespan exceeds that of a referee - while the occasional ref continues to meet the standard in their mid-to-late 40's, there seem to be far more ARs of that age group with huge experience, able to use that experience to support a young up-and-coming ref without any sense of doing down their own competitive self-interest.

I think dedicated ARs above a certain level should be a given. In other words, I'm surprised that they don't already exist in Wellington.

Just moving that idea along a little. What about putting a compulsory top age limit on the top refs but let them carry on doing the AR role?

 

[OB..]

Just moving that idea along a little. What about putting a compulsory top age limit on the top refs but let them carry on doing the AR role?

No. They are individuals, and will vary significantly in their physical prowess. An arbritrary age limit is therefore a bad idea. They already have fitness testing and assessments - let's leave it at that.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Ok - Lets consider an example. We had in Melb on Thursday Bryce L., Andrew Lees and James Leckie. Would you see them as a rotating partnership?

I'm thinking more at international level rather than domestic.

There would, of course, have to be an increase in the size of the panel, or a merging of the Referee and AR panels

 

[Rushforth]

I've been a player and TJ for decades, a Ref for a year or so (AR a bit longer, but nowhere near as often), a #4 since last month, and a #5 since today.

There is no realistic career track for ARs other than being a referee. That said, there is no reason that referees without great expectations should not be considered for positions #2 to #5 on a long term basis, but I'd argue only for a few games here and there.

My ideal would be teams of two referees supported by 3+ ARs and a referee coach at the levels where it starts to be common to have a team of three, this team working together for a season. Personally I would like to ref a game myself at least 75% of the time (grass roots blah).

 

[OB..]

I've been a player and TJ for decades, a Ref for a year or so (AR a bit longer, but nowhere near as often), a #4 since last month, and a #5 since today.

There is no realistic career track for ARs other than being a referee. That said, there is no reason that referees without great expectations should not be considered for positions #2 to #5 on a long term basis, but I'd argue only for a few games here and there.

My ideal would be teams of two referees supported by 3+ ARs and a referee coach at the levels where it starts to be common to have a team of three, this team working together for a season. Personally I would like to ref a game myself at least 75% of the time (grass roots blah).

Many ARs are referees who hit the buffers and were not going to progress further, but find they can AR at a higher level - and enjoy doing so.

You cannot expect a To3 to stay together for a whole season. Somebody will get hurt, be away on business (ARs are not professionals), etc. In any case, as I said, I think the actual number is small enough that they will work together on many occasions even without deliberate pairing.

 

[Skids]

Many ARs are referees who hit the buffers and were not going to progress further, but find they can AR at a higher level - and enjoy doing so.

You cannot expect a To3 to stay together for a whole season. Somebody will get hurt, be away on business (ARs are not professionals), etc. In any case, as I said, I think the actual number is small enough that they will work together on many occasions even without deliberate pairing.

Indeed they do already in the Aviva Premiership. I have a fellow RAFRURS Society member who ARs at this level and I often see him with the same guys.

 

[Mike Whittaker]

Teams of players develop a style of play which over a season may be different from that of another team to a significant extent. Whilst the same may not happen to the same extent with fixed teams of 3 or 4 it must be remembered that consistency across the game is an important factor for referees and assistants. Having considered this, I firmly believe that changing teams is preferable in the same way that referee exchanges across societies is preferable.

In the Premiership the Refs and ARs all know each other anyway now and I am sure they would wish to keep it that way.

 

[Simon Thomas]

In England a Society level we do not have the numbers of match officials to cover the thousands of matches and to have To3s except for special occasions outside of the usual League/Merit matches (unlike Oz, NZ, RSA we do not matches across the day, but they are all at once !). For L5 down to grassroots here is there is no full time AR/TJ career.

We do appoint for ARs for Semis and Finals, some County matches, and for promotion play offs.

However in England there has been a specialist AR career path for nearly a decade now as part of the RFU National AR Panel, who are appointed as Teams of 3 to all Premiership, Championship asnd National 1 and National 2 matches, plus County matches, top Schools Finals etc.

Hampshire has an IRB / Premiership-Elite AR, a second Premiership AR and or Chairman is in his first season as an Elite Premiership AR (so 3 out the 12 or so Permiership ARs); we have two other Panel ARs (one Navy one RAF), and we have a specialist National Panel AR Coach/Assessor. So I am pretty aware of what goes in at Elite / Panel levels and what how these guys operate.

The RFU has had a decicated TJ (now AR) panel for some seasons, and the IRB followed suit a few seasons ago. A RFU and the first IRB dedicated AR is a Hampshire members (Stuart T) and he spoke at a recent Society Training Meeting and gave some really good insights about his RWC 2011 experiences :

1. He has not, and has no wish to referee any more - he is an AR.
2. He could not referee at Elite level at any stage of his career.
3. Some of the errors in the RWC were caused by over-familiarity between himself and referees (Dave Pearson / Wayne Barnes) - they knew each other to well and made asumptions.
4. He was not in favour of dedicated To3s - the Elite Panels are pretty small as it is, and they operate as a total team so all members are interchangeable and benefit from exposure to everyone else (as Mike W says above) but of course are with same refs quite frequently.

In the past ARs have come from either been Federation or Group Refs not making it to the next stage, or ex-Panel Refs who are not quick enough to refeee at that level any more (physical not age issue as Bignij suggested and Dixie explained so coherently), plus the occasional Society Ref making through (very often via Combined Services where they get much more To3 experience). RFU are looking at this currently and I suspect ever fewer will make it direct from Societies or Federations in future. The Elite Panel is likely to be expandwed to cover Championship too, and many Panel Refs are appointed as ARs already.

 

[Pinky]

Just moving that idea along a little. What about putting a compulsory top age limit on the top refs but let them carry on doing the AR role?

It is probably also illegal as age discrimination, at least in the UK and probably most of Europe. The solution is to have fitness requirements and if refs can meet them, they stay at the grade, and if not, then the need to move down, or to the touchline, or all to often, unfortunately, they give up.

 

[didds]

... and keep all that expereince if they are fit enoug therefore... agreed


didds

 

[Simon Thomas]

which is exactly what happens in most cases (subject to family / business commitments) - some Panel Referees become Panel ARs, others return to their Society, others give up after many years of committed service.

Ashley Rowden came off the Elite Referees panel and became an Elite AR, and continues to referee at lower levels too.

Age is not the issue - performance and fitness are the criteria applied both in self-analysis and the Panel Management's appraisal.

 

[Mike Whittaker]

Unfortunately it is not only physical fitness that deteriorates with age :sad: So whilst not disagreeing with the need for a physical fitness test and the demotion or exclusion of those who fail, the ability to run up and down quickly for 80 mins is not enough to retain status. And that of course is why we have assessments - materiality matters.

One of the hardest jobs an assessor has is to tell a mature ref that he is making mistakes through not reading the game correctly and that perhaps a game at a lower level would be more suited. Writing that report is equally difficult. I am not sure that we get the training to handle it - easy to forget that this is, for most, a voluntary sport activity which we do for fun!

 

[Phil E]

I do it for the beer! epper: