discussing specifics with a team

[dave_clark]

hi all

hoping to get thoughts if i may...

Team X came away thinking what might have been and then talking to referees assessor only made the sense of injustice worse when he let us know he thought we were unlucky not only with the sending off offence but in the number of missed infringements the referee made. He spotted 35 missed infringements and only 6 were against Team X whilst nearly 30 should have gone against Team Y.

is it common for an assessor to go into this level of detail when chatting to a team afterwards? of course you need to take with a pinch of salt anything that's written by the losing team, but i wouldn't expect them to make up a conversation of this sort...

not from my club website before anyone goes looking for it :smile:

add to that a conversation i had with my club's director of rugby, regarding a league game earlier in the season. apparently the assessor apologised for the quality of the refereeing, and advised that the report that he would be writing would not be complementary. once again, to be taken with a pinch of salt, but seems odd that a conversation like that would be made up.

one of the reasons i ask is that i am shortly to get involved in watching immediate post-ELRA referees for London. when i've been doing this for my club referees i've made a point of not discussing anything about the refereeing with the coaches (as it's none of their business). appreciating the difference in level between what i'll be watching and the higher community grades, what are the expectations towards advisors at lower levels?

ta

 

[Simon Thomas]

An assessor / adviser / referee coach should rarely directly criticise a referee's performance in conversation with a DoR, Coach or Players, and never when it can be published ! However some old fashioned assessors can be like that, and especially those that have not climbed the assessor's grades hierarchy.

Often I will be part of a three or even four way conversation, but usually I will contribute and leave the referee to lead the conversation within his comfort zone. And I will support the referee, not hang him out in front of coaches/players. We use cryptic comments that experienced coaches understand - "we had a detailed review of the breakdown in our de-brief, and focussed on the role of the non-moving tackler" (after #6 & 7 Blue sent all match slowing down red's ball), or "we identified that John was mostly focussed on the challenges in the ruck and maul today" (and so missed blue's backs being yards offside every time).

Very occasionally I will have a concerned DoR or coach ask for a private chat - and that is how it stays and only with a DoR /coach who I know well and can trust.

At whatever level of match we must of course have an open and honest exchange of views & opinions, as that can only help mutual understanding and referee development. Our primary role after safety is to help the referee develop, secondly as a quality/consistency check, and thirdly as an ambassador for the Society/Federation/Group.

Especially at the post ELRA levels, the adviser is there to support the referee and deal with basic pointers to get some "quick wins" (scrum and line out management, positioning, whisatle & signals and managing the tackel/ruck. I would expect total protection of the referee at that level - how ever many mistakes the ref has made it is fewer than the players. I would focus on the refs good elements and highlight where he/she got a decision right to build confidence.

 

[beckett50]

I would always expect a degree of confidentiality from a coach/assessor.

Knowing ST I would expect nothing less and have no reason to suspect that other assessors I have met adopt a different approach to that outlined.