Six Nations referees

[Bryan]

FWIW, The TMO in question is on the IRB TMO Panel.

 

[tim White]

"The referee is the only person on the field who is not trying to cheat"

It used to be me -until I lightened up a little :bday: "trying NOT to cheat" actually;-making spectacular efforts to be absolutely impartial.

With reference to the player 'injury saga' IF, with my limited knowledge, the player looks unfit to continue -He Goes. No-one will know if you did the right thing, they sure as hell will if you do the wrong thing! I suspect no referee with any semblance of empathy is going to stop a visibly fit player from continuing 'just in case'

 

[SimonSmith]

I think this will be my last post on the subject of the docs and injury.

The Law is clear in what the referee is empowered to do. I'm clear in my head that the referee is the only person on the field who has no possible conflict of interest in whether or not the player continues.

I'm also clear that regardless of legal liability, on a personal level, if I heard a player slurring his words, I would remove him from the field and ask for immediate medical treatment. I may or may not be right, but the repercussions if I allow him to stay on the field wrongly are so much more worse than incorrectly asking him to leave.

I've had mild concussion several times, to the point of developing a minor speech defect. The referee SHOULD have asked me to leave the field.

I ask again: if you hear a player slurring his words, under what circumstances do you consider it acceptable to allow him to stay on?

And to address the liability issue: the Law is clear as to the referee's decision making powers in this arena. By implication, I think the referee is ultimately responsible for the player safety:
Q: Did you think the player was fit to continue?
A: No, but the Doctor said he was OK
Q: Did you agree with the Doctor?
A: No
Q: Are you aware that the Law allows you to override the Doctor and have the player replaced?
A: Yes
Q: Why did you not do so?
The only answer to that is that I did not apply the law as I may.

 

[Phil E]

I think this will be my last post on the subject of the docs and injury.

Bet it isn't

 

[OB..]

Q: Why did you not do so?
The only answer to that is that I did not apply the law as I may.

In other words you accept that there is no obligation. So under what circumstances do you accept that the referee should defer to the doctor?

Then of course you accept the judgement of a person who has better qualifications than you and has a greater duty of care.

I really cannot see a referee being sued under those circumstances.

All this is being based on the particular case where just about everybody thinks the doctor was wrong. It illustrates the principle that hard cases make bad law.

More common would be the case where the referee was unsure. If there is no medically qualified person present, then I would fully support your right to be cautious, but otherwise I would expect you to accept expert advice.

 

[Ian_Cook]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/2369484/Paddy-O-Brien-backs-Steve-Walsh-comeback



It's in their in black and white.

This means nothing, and I'm afraid media reports are not evidence of anything.

Just because they are friends does not mean it has anything to do with Walsh's appointment. What you are doing is accusing POB of corruption; of willfully picking a friend, for a job that another person was more deserving of, simply because he is a friend.

I'd really appreciate if you didn't carry on like that Ian. Quite frankly you're just embarrassing yourself, and no forum members want to see you do it anymore. Grow up, really quite mature Ian.

I can think of nothing more embarrassing than leveling unfounded (and quite frankly, preposterous) accusations of corruption against the iRB referee manager on a referee's forum! Its almost as embarrassing as accusing Keith Lawrence of nepotism... of wait! You did that too!!

And finally, just so that you understand how far off the beam you are POB is the referee manager, he is NOT a referee selector, and has little, if anything, to do with selecting the referees for the 6N.

Steve Hilditch of Ireland is the head of IRB Referee selectors. The others are Robert Francis, Tappe Henning and Michael Lamoullie. While POB works closely with them, he is NOT a selector and does NOT have a say!

 

[Mat 04]

"We are beginning the countdown towards Rugby World Cup 2011 and a streamlined panel of 10 top referees who will officiate at the tournament," said IRB Match Official Selection Committee Chairman and IRB Council Member David Pickering.


"However, there are still 10 months to go until the showcase tournament kicks off and there is plenty of time for places to be secured. We have worked hard on consistency across the board and referees and coaches have universally bought into the strict application of five key areas of Law."


"Collectively we are focused on further promoting consistency across all areas of officiating to ensure that those selected for Rugby World Cup 2011 are the best and that they will be in peak physical and performance condition for what promises to be a special tournament," added Pickering.

Are the Selectors & Appointers two seperate panels Ian?

 

[Ian_Cook]

Are the Selectors & Appointers two seperate panels Ian?

AIUI, the job of the selectors is to pick the IRB Elite referees panel and the TMO and ARs panel.

David Pickering must be a recent appointment to the panel, because I know that Henning and Hilditch are still on that panel., or were at least up until June.

http://www.irb.com/jwc/news/newsid=2038621.html

Its possible that another committee appoints referees from the panel to the various matches, but I don't think so. ST will probably know.



Edit:
Belay that. Pickering has been Chairman of the Panel since 2007, but AIUI, Hilditch is the Head Selector.

If you look at almost any appointments list (the PDF ones issued by the IRB) you will see Hilditch, Lamoulie and Henning listed in the PR (performance review) column.

 

[chief]

Ian you always over exaggerate things with your use of these 'extreme' words. Bias, corruption.

From what I understand, the ARU in this example of Steve Walsh, nominated Walsh and Dickinson to be selected on the IRB panel. Dickinson was, Walsh wasn't. I find it extremely unusual that when Walsh was reinstated on the IRB panel in September. When in fact the ARU hadn't nominated him.

I work in the Legal trade Ian, when a mate gives another mate a job over someone else, then it's not really seen as corruption.

Then by this case Ian, you were sticking up for Lyndon Bray, with the Glen Jackson fast track. That means he surely is corrupt as well.

Hypocrite.

 

[Ian_Cook]

IFrom what I understand, the ARU in this example of Steve Walsh, nominated Walsh and Dickinson to be selected on the IRB panel. Dickinson was, Walsh wasn't. I find it extremely unusual that when Walsh was reinstated on the IRB panel in September. When in fact the ARU hadn't nominated him.

You just contradicted yourself chief. Either Walsh was nominated or he wasn't.

I work in the Legal trade Ian, when a mate gives another mate a job over someone else, then it's not really seen as corruption.

What is it then? What is the "correct" legal term. (we call it "jobs for the boys" or "spoiling")

Whatever it is, it would be tantamount to corruption

You're in the trade, so you should know.

Then by this case Ian, you were sticking up for Lyndon Bray, with the Glen Jackson fast track. That means he surely is corrupt as well.

Hypocrite.

WTF??

You are totally up the creek there chief. Why would Bray be "corrupt" for fending off MEDIA assertions that Jackson wasn't ready to be fast tracked?

YOU are making an accusation that the iRB Referee Manager, Paddy O'Brien, has favored one referee over another PURELY because they are friends. This is a very serious allegation, which if true, would almost certainly lose him his job.

You have based this outrageous accusation on one obscure news story which states only that O'Brien was Walsh's friend and mentor. The news story doesn't even mention Walsh's appointment, nor does it draw any conclusion that Walsh is receiving any kind of favorable treatment; you made that up entirely off your own bat. Your conclusions are unsupported by anyone else.

In short, you are WRONG!!!

 

[Bryan]

And finally, just so that you understand how far off the beam you are POB is the referee manager, he is NOT a referee selector, and has little, if anything, to do with selecting the referees for the 6N.

Steve Hilditch of Ireland is the head of IRB Referee selectors. The others are Robert Francis, Tappe Henning and Michael Lamoullie. While POB works closely with them, he is NOT a selector and does NOT have a say!

Ian, I agreed with your post regarding conflicts on interest, selection policies, and general terms of how referees are selected primarily based on merit and not on who is drinking buddies with who. HOWEVER, I'm now going to correct the erroneous statements you've made about the selection panel of the IRB referees.

The selection committee is made up of the following people:

Steven Hilditch (IRFU)
Tappe Henning (SARU)
Bob Francis (NZRU)
Michel Lamoulie (FFR)
Kevin Bowring (RFU and Elite Coaches Representative)
Paddy O'Brien (Ex-Officio, IRB Referees Manager)
David Pickering (WRU, IRB Council Member and Chairman)

There is nothing secret about the above-mentioned individuals. When the appointments come out, these gentlemen are all copied on the emails out of Dublin.

The majority of the reports on referees from the Tier-1 internationals are done by the above individuals (mainly to get more consistency in the PR process and keep the core group looking at the majority of matches).

Now, to say that Paddy is in no way involved in the selection process is erroneous. He receives copies of ALL reports of IRB-appointed referees to IRB tournaments; he is part of the selection committee meetings not simply as an administrator (there is another referees' administrator who helps a lot with the logistics, and she's awesome), but as one of the selectors responsible in managing the IRB panel of referees and is often physically at the tournament itself (JWCs, RWCs, 6-Nations, November Tests, etc). To say that he plays no role in the overall selection process is, to quote your words, "Totally Up the creek".

(Chief, I am in no way lending credibility to your thoughts on how Steve Walsh, or anyone else for that matter, is selected based on something beyond merit; I'm only addressing Ian's statements in the context that someone who he says has no influence in the selection process is in fact one of the key stakeholders).

 

[Ian_Cook]

The selection committee is made up of the following people:

Steven Hilditch (IRFU)
Tappe Henning (SARU)
Bob Francis (NZRU)
Michel Lamoulie (FFR)
Kevin Bowring (RFU and Elite Coaches Representative)
Paddy O'Brien (Ex-Officio, IRB Referees Manager)
David Pickering (WRU, IRB Council Member and Chairman)
.

In every committee, panel or board I have been involved with, Ex-Officio members have not had voting rights unless the issue under discussion related directly to the business or organisation for which their Ex-Officio status was recognised. For example, the Landowners of the property on which our Pony Club has its Cross-Country course, are Ex-Officio members of our Committee, however, the only time they have a vote is when the item under discussion relates directly to the use of their land.

If POB does have a vote on that Panel, (and that would be unusual although not unheard I imagine), then I maintain that he still has hardly any say in referee selection. He would be one vote out of seven, i.e. 14% of the decision making process. That's "hardly any say" in my book, and certainly not enough to "force" a friend onto the panel ahead of a more meritorious candidate.

Chief implied that POB "selected" Walsh ahead of others because he was his friend, a simply preposterous allegation, which you and I have both adequately debunked. POB does NOT select referees for the panel, and nor does he appoint them to matches. That is a Panel decision, not POB's

 

[Account Deleted]

It's not unusual for ex-officio board members to have voting rights. The "Pony Club" situation is slightly different from many such post holders. I would assume that they are there to protect the landowners. When a person is on a board, by virtue of their office withing the organisation things are a little different.

Regarding POB; by virtue of his office, I would imagine his input would carry considerable weight. That is not to say any "unreasonable" stance he might take would be accepted without question by the rest of the board.

 

[OB..]

An ex-officio member can vote. The word ex-officio simply means that the person is a member of a committe or board because of their position, i.e., president but has nothing to do with that person's right to vote on the committee (for which they are rightfully a member).

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_an_ex-officio_member_vote

 

[Ian_Cook]

Ok, so it appears an Ex-Officio can vote unless precluded or restricted by By-Laws. I just must have just been "unlucky" enough to have only served on committees where Ex-Officio members were either precluded from voting or had limited voting rights.

While POB's opinion may have considerable weight as ATTR says, the fact is that performance reviews are carried out by people who are also members of the selection panel; Tappe Henning, Steve Hilditch. Michel Lamoulie and Bob Francis. They would surely notice if a referee who they had reviewed as poor, was being pushed hard by POB. There are sufficient checks and balances in the system to prevent that happening, because, at the end of the day, as I said earlier, POB has only vote out of seven.

All this goes to show chief's assertion that Steve Walsh was "only put on the IRB panel by Paddy O'Brien because they are great mates" is preposterous in the extreme.

 

[Account Deleted]

I would agree with Ian's last post.

 

[ex-lucy]

of course anotehr way of looking at this situation .. Walsh being given preferential treatment (?)... is that to curry favour with POB .. for a quid pro quo .. they move Walsh up the ratings and give him a plum appt .. so that come the world cup or 3N .. they can turn around and say .. quid pro quo ... how about X or Y ?
maybe i read too much John Le Carre...

 

[Davet]

Once you've had your quo why do you have to give a quid?

 

[tim White]

I don't mind 'A Bit Of Quo' but what have squid got to do with it? :wink:

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

referees are selected primarily based on merit and not on who is drinking buddies with who.

Good job - it'd be huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge commitee room if it had to hold all of (ahem some referee's) drinking buddies! :biggrin: :wow: :biggrin: :wow: