Waybe Barnes Yellow Card Sexton 10

[Pegleg]

Compare unsanctioned Bradley Davies off the ball tip tackle on Donnacha Ryan. (Might might have been a Red card offense during Ireland v Wales 2012 6Nations game.)
Yet Wayne Barnes sin-binned Stephen Ferris in the final minute of that game for taking Ian Evans over the horizontal. At around 11 minutes into clip. Yellow is correct call, but no way earlier infringement should have gone unpunished.

Small margins win International matches, referees influence such games to no small extent.

That call was made (in error for me) by the AR who described, almost word for word the red card terms in the then directive only to recommend a YC. The ref accepted the call of the ARpresumable because the AR saw it and the ref did not.

 

[L'irlandais]

The "Bias" problem exists in Rugby refereeing, whether you accept it or not.
I do take on board Ian's point that Ireland would be better off adapting to the referee's interpretation. But they already do a vast amount of referee analysis prior to each and every game; this in itself speaks volumes of the influence on the game of an accumulation of subjective decisions over 80 minutes.
Every ref must have at least one club on his circuit who say "Oh no! not HIM again."

I also accept the point there is a difference between on the one hand,

...perceived bias à la Steve Walsh versus England :

England unhappy with referee Steve Walsh's performance in defeat by Wales as they report official to IRB
Either England’s inquiry has legitimacy or it does not. You cannot take fans’ money and hide behind protocol about the sanctity of referees.

...And on the other hand a real scientifically measurable phenomena :

A study of the 2009 Super Rugby competition and the European Super League from 2006 to 2009 involving British teams and a solitary French side that indicates a strong correlation between a referee’s identity and bias.

Rugby is characterised by the necessity for referees to make a large number of subjective decisions in ambiguous decision. This study shows that this subjectivity may play a disproportionate role in the final match result. One of the ways forward could be to use technological innovations for some categories of decisions like offsides and forward passes. A.N.Other article about the same report

Thanks for that pegleg, fair enough he was let down by his AR in this case.

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

The "Bias" problem exists in Rugby refereeing, whether you accept it or not.
I do take on board Ian's point that Ireland would be better off adapting to the referee's interpretation. But they already do a vast amount of referee analysis prior to each and every game; this in itself speaks volumes of the influence on the game of an accumulation of subjective decisions over 80 minutes.
Every ref must have at least one club on his circuit who say "Oh no! not HIM again."

I also accept the point there is a difference between on the one hand, perceived bias à la Steve Walsh versus England

England unhappy with referee Steve Walsh's performance in defeat by Wales as they report official to IRB
Either England’s inquiry has legitimacy or it does not. You cannot take fans’ money and hide behind protocol about the sanctity of referees.

And on the other hand a real scientifically measurable phenomena :

A study of the 2009 Super Rugby competition and the European Super League from 2006 to 2009 involving British teams and a solitary French side that indicates a strong correlation between a referee’s identity and bias.

Rugby is characterised by the necessity for referees to make a large number of subjective decisions in ambiguous decision. This study shows that this subjectivity may play a disproportionate role in the final match result. One of the ways forward could be to use technological innovations for some categories of decisions like offsides and forward passes. A.N.Other article about the same report

Thanks for that pegleg, fair enough he was let down by his AR in this case.

The final report you quote talk about home nation bias. WB did grow up close to the border but I'm pretty sure he would identify as English over Welsh? Also you claim he has a bias against Ireland, rather than pro-Wales. Which one is it? I still find it bizarre you are talking about bias and subjectivity but fail to highlight your own likely bias from an Irish perspective....

 

[L'irlandais]

Hello Thunderhorse1986,
You said this in your post #77 and I answered it in my post #78.
Also there is little point in quoting my post when answering directly above it.
It* serves only to pad the discussion out.

Exactly the point made by the author of report linked in my #62

And for rugby, the solution to me is that the performance of referees needs to be evaluated more transparently. A panel of independent officials could analyze matches, producing a report on the match. This report could analyze every single one of the 200 decisions a referee has to make in a match. How many of the 200 were incorrect? 20? 30? And of those 30, how many were clear, conclusive errors, and how many were interpretive calls? One has to build in this human interpretation element, because it would be wrong to think that one can accurately judge off TV when the referee is 5m away from the decision he is making

Nobody is accusing the man of match fixing!

Was it wrong of me to add to the discussion that it was not the first time poor calls from this particular ref have cost Ireland, then citing 5 compelling* examples.
* YMMV

If a characteristic like nationality can affect our decision making, why would our other characteristics not do as much

Source. (from #62) *Quoting can save having to scroll back to previous pages.

 

[Pegleg]

I think Ian made the point well. Different refs have different styles / approaches. As a team you prepare for both the opposition and the referee. If Ireland fail to prepare for WB then more fool them. Just as any other team would deserve to come a cropper if they fail to prepare.

If Ireland fall foul of WB perhaps they need to prepare for him better!

 

[L'irlandais]

I think the fact that Ireland only gave away 4 penalties (compared to 10 for Wales) shows just how much more referee analysis IRFU do compared to other home Nations. The team are well aware of the referee's quirks. But why should teams like NZ and Ireland have to renounce on their winning style rugby, because world rugby advocates a more liberal approach to the breakdown, which favours defenders slowly the ball down. This approach killed off the famous French flair, the game is all the poorer for it.

The Ireland camp also made the point in the run up to this match, a team can only spend so much time analyzing the opposition and the ref. At some point that team needs to concentrate on their own strengths, weakness and game plan.

These forums were created to allow discussion of game management to improve the game. The weak link in the Elite game is just how much influence the referee has on the match result and how much the Laws are open to interpretation. 1000s of Pro players spend their working life improving their game. Most refereees have to concentrate on their day job for much of the week in the run up to a game.

 

[ChuckieB]

...... The team are well aware of the referee's quirks. But why should teams like NZ and Ireland have to renounce on their winning style rugby, because world rugby advocates a more liberal approach to the breakdown, which favours defenders slowly the ball down. This approach killed off the famous French flair, the game is all the poorer for it.

....yet NZ and Ireland have adapted, whereas it could be argued that the French have failed spectacularly to do the same.

French rugby and hence the game is all the poorer for it.

 

[ChuckieB]

These forums were created to allow discussion of game management to improve the game. The weak link in the Elite game is just how much influence the referee has on the match result and how much the Laws are open to interpretation. 1000s of Pro players spend their working life improving their game. Most refereees have to concentrate on their day job for much of the week in the run up to a game.

.........not much concentration on the day job going on here? :chin:

 

[DocY]

I think the fact that Ireland only gave away 4 penalties (compared to 10 for Wales) shows just how much more referee analysis IRFU do compared to other home Nations. The team are well aware of the referee's quirks. But why should teams like NZ and Ireland have to renounce on their winning style rugby, because world rugby advocates a more liberal approach to the breakdown, which favours defenders slowly the ball down. This approach killed off the famous French flair, the game is all the poorer for it.

The Ireland camp also made the point in the run up to this match, a team can only spend so much time analyzing the opposition and the ref. At some point that team needs to concentrate on their own strengths, weakness and game plan.

These forums were created to allow discussion of game management to improve the game. The weak link in the Elite game is just how much influence the referee has on the match result and how much the Laws are open to interpretation. 1000s of Pro players spend their working life improving their game. Most refereees have to concentrate on their day job for much of the week in the run up to a game.

Equally you could ask why South Africa should renounce their style when you get a stricter referee? The referee's style is always going to benefit one team more than the other and this is not unfair.

The same reason it's not unfair and that you'd adapt your style to the weather or the ground conditions.

I take your point about referees having a big influence over results, but to me this is part of the beauty of the game and I'd no more advocate taking it away than I'd advocate only playing in good weather on firm pitches.

It's easy to win if you always play in the optimal conditions for your style with a referee who's sympathetic to that style, but a great team has to be able to adapt to such things and be able to win when conditions (and I include the referee under 'conditions') hinder them.

 

[Pegleg]

I think the fact that Ireland only gave away 4 penalties (compared to 10 for Wales) shows just how much more referee analysis IRFU do compared to other home Nations. The team are well aware of the referee's quirks. But why should teams like NZ and Ireland have to renounce on their winning style rugby, because world rugby advocates a more liberal approach to the breakdown, which favours defenders slowly the ball down.

So the underlined bit tends to sugget little bias (intentional or otherwise) againd Ireland.

The bold bit is so sweet in the irony. Sexton was pinged for the very action you bemoan (slowing the ball down).

 

[L'irlandais]

:shrug: Given that he failed to penalise George North for the same offense earlier in the Red Zone.

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

- You say Wayne Barnes is guilty of anti-Irish bias but you don't seem to believe you could be guilty of the oppoisite bias
- You want and independent reviews of games to show if decisions were correct but when a (seemingly) independent group of refs (i.e. in this thread) show a broad consensus that Barnes' decisions were correct in law, you reject those findings...
- You say World Rugby is guilty of promoting an interpretation of the laws that does not favour Ireland, but also claim it is WB with the anti-Irish stance

:shrug::shrug::shrug:

 

[SimonSmith]

Clever piece of editing you've done there. At least have the guts to stand by what you wrote.

You've cut out the bit where you suggest that WB's decisions were being made through rose tinted glasses. The clear implication is that you mean he was going against green for the sake of England. That's not unconscious bias, that's a deliberate act.

You're manifesting a total lack of integrity.

 

[Pegleg]

:shrug: Given that he failed to penalise George North for the same offense earlier in the Red Zone.

You had a PK at the GN incident albeit not against North. Possibly this was because he did not , in the eyes of the officials materially effect play. Possibly becaue he can only award you one PK or do you thing Ireland should have gotten TWO penalties? That way after they messed up the first line out they would have had a eond chance. Now there's a thought ( NOT!)

I don't wish to accuse you of green shirt bias. so I'll leave that to others on here.

 

[L'irlandais]

Excuse me Simon Smith, i have not edited my post #62.
I quoted the report part to show Thunderhorse1986.

I joined in a discussion with other Irish referees who felt the YC was harsh. There is a different discussion for WB fans elsewhere on RRF.

 

[SimonSmith]

Mate, the fricking page shows that you edited it at 00:03 my time a day ago...

 

[L'irlandais]

I often edit to straighten out formatting. If I recall correctly I added a final paragraph into the Green textarea shortly after I originally posted.

Clever piece of editing you've done there. At least have the guts to stand by what you wrote.

You've cut out the bit where you suggest that WB's decisions were being made through rose tinted glasses. The clear implication is that you mean he was going against green for the sake of England. That's not unconscious bias, that's a deliberate act.

You're manifesting a total lack of integrity.

Here is #62 as it stands. Your suggestion that I have edited out the rose tinted glasses comment is simply false.

GN lying on the wrong side of the ruck, hasn't released the bc and makes no effort to roll away in the red zone. WB doesn't even consider if a penalty offense, preferring to give advantage to Green against Red8 the tackle assist. If JS situation was so different, I don't see it. Perhaps rose tinted glasses affecting his view of things...

‪Here a report that goes some way to showing what I mean. It also conversely backs up your position. So just because you are right, it doesn't necessarily follow that I must be wrong.‬

Rugby presents a unique challenge in that the referee is required to make a specific decision about a contested tackle almost 200 times a match (once every 30 seconds), and this*decision is multi-dimensional, instantaneous and open to interpretation.‪..‬

Consider that a typical match has about 170 rucks (or contests for the ball in a tackle) , and you realize that there are probably 100 decisions (because not all are contested the same way) where the referee must interpret, in a split second, a dizzying array of laws, and where each decision has implications for what follows.

The first approach is to over-police the contest (the conservative). *The result is that the referee will appear to punish legitimate contesting for the ball, and will reward penalties frequently, forcing players to back right off, killing the contest for the ball. *This favors the team in possession. *Alternatively, the referee can under-police the breakdowns (liberal), and allow much more to go unpenalized.
Importantly, when this happens, the*result is that the defending team will usually be favoured,*because the referee will fail to prevent them from slowing the ball down, and slowing it down creates a disproportionate advantage

Source

Getting tired of such accusations.

 

[winchesterref]

Either way, you're still suggesting WB is biased against the Irish because he is English, which is quite staggering, and quite unacceptable.

 

[Shelflife]

I didnt have a problem with the YC, cynical play from Sexton denying quick ball. It was an easy card to give really.

Wales were on Barnes radar for their pens inside the 22, Best had spoken to him and I feel that another pen would have earned a YC.

Overall ive no complaints with Barnes he had a good game.

 

[TheBFG]

:wow: Go to the hardware store, buy some wood and nails, build a bridge and get over it! :wink:

You wouldn't even be having this drawn out discussion if your stupid centre knew WTF he was doing!