The difference between SH and NH - truth or myth?

[Dan Cottrell]

I expect someone will point me to this debate on another post, but given the outcomes from the Lions tests, can we surmise there is no difference between the two hemispheres, just a difference between referees?

 

[Dixie]

I expect someone will point me to this debate on another post, but given the outcomes from the Lions tests, can we surmise there is no difference between the two hemispheres, just a difference between referees?

Not quite. There is indeed a difference, but we need to determine cause and effect. In my view, the refs (at least in the SH) are given a brief about what the commercial imperative is. Armed with that brief, they then referee in a particular way to achieve quick breakdowns: limited tolerance of contest at the breakdown, speed of tackler rolling away etc. This refereeing style imposes selection criteria on coaches, who accordingly select their teams to gain maximum advantage from the prevailing conditions.

In the NH, where either there are no commercial imperatives signalled to refs, or those imperatives are different in light of the heavier pitches and less generous weather conditions, the breakdown is more of a contest leading to different selection criteria.

So the difference in refereeing styles dictates a difference in playing styles. In the aftermath of the 3rd test, I suggested that had Joubert been in the middle rather than on the touchline, then the Lions scrum might have been emasculated, the Aussie loose game would have been facilitated and a different result might have been achieved. I suggested that this is far too large a potential impact for referees to exert. The iRB needs to get a grip - which means the game is doomed!

 

[Robert Burns]

I'm not sure it's all commercial, but you basically right on the guiding differences.

Having been a referee in both, I find the SH way quite good to let a game flow, basically the ethos is this:

Tackle occurs,
Referees are told to let the tackle breathe, that means give a second to see what happens, does the attacking team secure their ball legally, does a defender try to beat the ruck, if so are they successful. If they are successful does the attacking team successfully clean them out?

This all happens within a second of the tackle, so we wait to see what happens.

Most of the time the attacking team secures their ball. (either by being their first, or clearing out the defender quickly)
Next most frequent is a defender stealing the ball.
Next most frequent is Defense get a penalty for the ball carrier being isolated & not releasing
Next is attack get a penalty for the defender not beating the ruck and not listing to the referee for 'Hands Off' or going for a second shot.

After that you then have all the other tackle & ruck offences/scenarios.

I believe the NH referees resisted this approach for a while, but the quality of rugby it generally produces speaks for itself and they are coming around the benefits, the main issue is the interpretation of how long that breath is, and how much tolerance there is to the 'niggles' you get during that breath.

Examples:

Most SH Referees will give it the full second unless there is a very obvious offence, NH's are generally still quicker.
Most SH Referees will give very little instruction but will penalise quickly for players doing wrong, a number of NH refs will allow players to react to their instruction (Clancy & Garces for example).

These slight difference can make a huge difference to the way a team plays at the top level, but then again top level teams are smart enough to do their homework on a referee before a big game, so what they get should, in the majority of times, be what they knew would happen.

Pitch conditions & weather are certainly also a contributory factor, I have never come off a pitch in Australia freezing my nuts off and unable to feel my fingers. I don't miss that!

 

[didds]

well the lions looked pretty clueless as to the refs for the 1st two tests so while I agree entirely with what robert said, it doesn't seem to happen - or idf it does it gets forgotten as soon as the KO whistle goes!

didds

 

[OB..]

well the lions looked pretty clueless as to the refs for the 1st two tests so while I agree entirely with what robert said, it doesn't seem to happen - or idf it does it gets forgotten as soon as the KO whistle goes!

didds

A lot of play is instinctive, and it is pretty hard to unlearn instincts.

 

[Shelflife]

You also have different referees. Joubert will give pen after pen and no yellow, Poite will get the cards out early. I don't think this is a north/south thing just different reffing styles. Rolland will make the big call where others will fudge it and give a yellow. Some refs will call roll away others will just ping them straight away. It could be that the refs adapt to the playing style that they see in front of them week in week out as well.

 

[Ian_Cook]

There are a a couple of key differences in the way NH and SH look at jacklers over the ball

NH referees seem to allow Jacklers to put their hands on the ground beyond the ball and sweep the ball backward out of the tackled player's hands, so that they are effectively on their feet at the moment the ball is grasped. Similarly, they also seem to allow players to rest temporarily on their hands or forearms before jackling. This is my observation for the elite ones. I can't speak to the issue with grass roots NH referees as I haven't seen any since 1987.

Neither of these techniques is permitted in the SH, as O'Driscoll found out, but Poite allowed it in the third test. You have to be on your feet and supporting your own weight coming into jackle and the whole time while you are jackling.

IMO two things need to happen if refereeing world-wide is to gain some consistency.

1. All refereeing guidelines at the Pro levels need to be taken out of the hands of individual unions and other organisations, and controlled directly by the iRB. We need to put a stop to the RFU, FFR WRU, NZRU, SANZAR, ERC etc issuing their own edicts to top referees as to how the game is to be refereed.

2. Exchanges at top levels, NH referees in ITM Cup, Super Rugby and Currie Cup, SH referees in Aviva Premiership, Pro12 and Top 14. Yes it would be expensive, but it is important enough to be a worthwhile expense.

 

[Dickie E]

2. Exchanges at top levels, NH referees in ITM Cup, Super Rugby and Currie Cup, SH referees in Aviva Premiership, Pro12 and Top 14. Yes it would be expensive, but it is important enough to be a worthwhile expense.

Well, we've had Steve Walsh sponging off the ARU for a few years now so a couple more blow-ins wouldn't kill us.

 

[damo]

+1 to some more referee exchanges.

Not only will the players and referees get used to each other, but it will also familiarise the fans with the style of each ref, so that when they get them in a test match they know what to expect.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Well, we've had Steve Walsh sponging off the ARU for a few years now so a couple more blow-ins wouldn't kill us.

Steve Walsh moving across the ditch to the West Island has actually given you your only referee of international standard; the first one you've had since Dick Byers!!

Any other Aussie referees refereeing Tier One tests at the moment?


But seriously, if a NH referee like, say. Wayne Barnes or George Clancy, was offered the opportunity to referee a full season of Super Rugby, don't you think they would grab it with both hands.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Clancy yes, Barnes unlikely as he will increasingly have his legal commitments to bear in mind.

 

[Dickie E]

Clancy yes, Barnes unlikely as he will increasingly have his legal commitments to bear in mind.

Is he up on charges?

 

[Robert Burns]

Clancy yes, Barnes unlikely as he will increasingly have his legal commitments to bear in mind.

They have a legal system here too you know. :biggrin:

And more than one weeks sun a year!

Could think of worse places for newlyweds to start a family.

 

[tim White]

Careful with the sarcasm, its 30C in Kendal today -should I drop down to only one vest or is that just a bit hasty?

 

[ddjamo]

Steve Walsh moving across the ditch to the West Island has actually given you your only referee of international standard; the first one you've had since Dick Byers!!

Any other Aussie referees refereeing Tier One tests at the moment?


But seriously, if a NH referee like, say. Wayne Barnes or George Clancy, was offered the opportunity to referee a full season of Super Rugby, don't you think they would grab it with both hands.

after they rest them temporarily on the ground...

 

[ddjamo]

robbie - are these true stats? the actual order in oz? in the states and canada I would say the order is a bit different. number 4 gets more weight...

1 Most of the time the attacking team secures their ball. (either by being their first, or clearing out the defender quickly)
2 Next most frequent is a defender stealing the ball.
3 Next most frequent is Defense get a penalty for the ball carrier being isolated & not releasing
4 Next is attack get a penalty for the defender not beating the ruck and not listing to the referee for 'Hands Off' or going for a second shot.

 

[Rassie]

The SH referees favor the attacking side and will penalize the the defending team more t the breakdown where the NH referees are more strict on the attacking team at the breakdown. That is the difference basically

 

[Rushforth]

The SH referees favor the attacking side and will penalize the the defending team more t the breakdown where the NH referees are more strict on the attacking team at the breakdown. That is the difference basically

Rassie, I have never seen any (halfway decent) referee from either hemisphere be "more strict on the attacking team". The team in possession almost always gets the benefit of the doubt, at least as long as they do nothing egregious.

But to return to the OP, in SH (i.e. Oz) it is not uncommon to pick 15 all-round rugby players, whereas in Europe it is considered normal to pick props to play at prop. And props to score tries

When both teams are playing to the same hymn-sheet, it doesn't really matter what the referee does, in terms of the final result.

When the two teams play very differently, they may notice a difference. If suddenly refereed by a guy who knows what a scrum is, against a team with a decent pack, yeah.

There is a reason that all the best SH refs are Saffers.

 

[Rassie]

Rassie, I have never seen any (halfway decent) referee from either hemisphere be "more strict on the attacking team". The team in possession almost always gets the benefit of the doubt, at least as long as they do nothing egregious.

But to return to the OP, in SH (i.e. Oz) it is not uncommon to pick 15 all-round rugby players, whereas in Europe it is considered normal to pick props to play at prop. And props to score tries

When both teams are playing to the same hymn-sheet, it doesn't really matter what the referee does, in terms of the final result.

When the two teams play very differently, they may notice a difference. If suddenly refereed by a guy who knows what a scrum is, against a team with a decent pack, yeah.

There is a reason that all the best SH refs are Saffers.

SH pick props to play at prop as well. Last few team try to convert players was 99 NZ AB (WC 99), Springboks (1997 team coached by Du Plessis who lost series to Lions) and the Wallabies (2013 Lost series to Lions)

If you instruct referees to concentrate on a certain area in the game in one part of the world and they are being told to concentrate on another area on the otherwise of the world you are going to get totally different look out at things.

Honestly I feel real sorry for any referee in this country. SA supporters can abusive at times. Referees from school level up to highest level got it bad at times. But one can partly blame tv for misinforming the public stuggling to understand that its laws not rules and they are watching it from a bias mindset.

 

[Rushforth]

I like it how you guys says no to a opinion like another ones opinion is a fact.

You are welcome to your opinion, I was stating mine.

I'm not very high on the totem pole as far as instructing referees goes, either. NH seems to agree with SH that the ball can travel in the direction of the oppo dead ball line, for example.

Rassie, get a whistle and ref some kids. The 10-12 age-group is easiest. Please.