• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Reffing discussions

Peat

International
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
9,990
Country Flag
England
Club or Nation
Ulster
In future, could we consider having a separate thread in the international forum for all post-match discussion of refs, with a zero-tolerance policy of arguing about them in the match threads?

Maybe I'm overreacting to a temporary problem, but it hasn't half been annoying, and it seems that a separate thread for people who must have those debates might be the best way to keep people happy.
 
In future, could we consider having a separate thread in the international forum for all post-match discussion of refs, with a zero-tolerance policy of arguing about them in the match threads?

Maybe I'm overreacting to a temporary problem, but it hasn't half been annoying, and it seems that a separate thread for people who must have those debates might be the best way to keep people happy.

I created a laws thread for exactly that purpose... When ever I said let's move the discussion there I was told to **** off by smart cooky. :)

It's now become a 10 page padded cell for siege & simon g
 
In future, could we consider having a separate thread in the international forum for all post-match discussion of refs, with a zero-tolerance policy of arguing about them in the match threads?

Maybe I'm overreacting to a temporary problem, but it hasn't half been annoying, and it seems that a separate thread for people who must have those debates might be the best way to keep people happy.

To be fair, the slating of the referee is part in parcel of the discussion. Bad calls by refs are only discussed. You hardly see a discussion about the right calls the ref made because its not worth discussing.

I will steer clear, because I have also started a thread a while ago about the standard of refereeing. And although it was after the Bryce Lawrence/Romain Poite debacles, it became a slating thread instead of a discussion thread.
 
To be fair, the slating of the referee is part in parcel of the discussion. Bad calls by refs are only discussed. You hardly see a discussion about the right calls the ref made because its not worth discussing.

I will steer clear, because I have also started a thread a while ago about the standard of refereeing. And although it was after the Bryce Lawrence/Romain Poite debacles, it became a slating thread instead of a discussion thread.

It is, but sometimes it makes for a really crap discussion. In this case, it simply hasn't been possible to have a discussion of the England vs New Zealand game. I don't want to tell people what to discuss but equally I don't want other people's discussions to drown out any possibility of people actually discussing the game.

Which is why I am suggesting this. I daresay it would turn into a massive *****/slate/whine/insanity-fest - but people who want to do that can do that, and people who want to discuss the match can discuss the match. It's not perfect, but surely it's better than having to lock a match thread with barely any discussion of the actual match?
 
Appreciate the idea Peat though I suspect it w would be very hard to separate the game from the way it is reffed. For example since nothing about scrummaging is uncontentious, do I assume that all scrum related talk should go here?

Worth a try I suppose. We could call it instead the 'forensic analysis' thread where people post gifs and videos demonstrating key events. Many disagreements are solvable simply by posting video evidence.
 
No idea what you'd do about scrummaging calls tbh.
 
I don't really see the point, personally. Just because people are discussing the referee that doesn't mean you can't discuss other things too. In most people's first post-game posts a number of topics were discussed, but it quickly became evident that the most contentious discussion was the refereeing. I don't see why this should be moved to a different thread when everyone in the match thread knows why it is being discussed - it's not like refereeing discussions are about one single piece of law, so to lump them all in the same thread seems counter intuitive.

As it is we already have two threads discussing every match (the team dedicated thread and the match dedicated thread - though admittedly this mainly seems to be a an issue in the English thread). Having a third seems beyond pointless.
 
Bloody Nigel Owens. The more I read that match thread the angrier I get with him. He ruined it. He ruined the beautiful thread.....

While I do understand the reasoning behind the suggested 'reffing discussion' thread I feel it may be (a) difficult to enforce and (b) mean an important talking point is absent from the thread.

I do agree something should be done - the England/All Blacks thread was an embarrassment - so this may well be worth a go. I do feel the biggest issue in that thread was not the fact referee decisions were being discussed, rather a small minority of posters were either unable or unwilling to discuss them in a civilised manner. This off course wound up the (usually) resonable posters from one side, which in turn wound up the (usually) resonable posters from the other side. What resulted was that abomination of a match thread. Removing the more controversial parts of a match ( reffing decisions) may help in some way, but unless posters are mature enough to discuss in a civil manner it may not help. The victors will still be puffing up their chest a prancing around (while claiming they are being modest), while the losers will still claim they were robbed/food poisened/played poorly/ had too many injuries....

Sorry, went a bit off topic. I will stop ranting now. My view is it is worth a shot....
 
You simply cannot separate discussions about games from discussion about officiating in games. Its just not possible. If you try, then discussion thread about games will likely peter out shortly after full time.

Personally, if you excluded all mention of referees and controversial decisions from match threads, I would not even bother participating.
 
Last edited:
thinking about it it is going to be difficult to seperate them out, and the laws thread has been destroyed by siege and simon g.

I guess the best outcome for all would just be for people to behave themselves and discuss it civilly, nt troll and not belittle people when they aren't agreeing on a specific incident.
 
I don't think a separate thread would work. People will still make throwaway comments about referees in the main thread, others will object, and a big discussion will happen anyway. I don't think many people would go looking for that type of discussion in a separate thread, unless it was enforced. And it's awkward and clunky to migrate a discussion to another thread when you are halfway through.

I would think that people should just try to drown it out with other discussion if they are bored of it. :p
 
I think it just can't be separated. The reality is that every year there will be a handful of people with -100 posts who are going to come on the forum and make exaggerated complaints on matches that have particularly angered them. There is no way that even if we did try and leave all referee discussions to one thread, that new posters are going to try and find the correct etiquette to ***** about refereeing decisions. At the end of the day it just takes more experienced posters to reign in some of the more stupid remarks, particularly when it is from supporters of their own team, as that's how these threads always degenerate and get an 'us verse them' mentality.
 
thinking about it it is going to be difficult to seperate them out, and the laws thread has been destroyed by siege and simon g.

gn10.png
Use this!

sigesige and simon g will soon lose interest if mods keep responding to their stupid & pointless posts by deleting them.
 
I'm definitely in the "keep it in the match thread" camp. As others have pointed out, it's part of the match, and it should be able to be discussed.

You could also have trouble determining what a refereeing decision is, for example, if player A gets carded during the game, is discussing the refs part, or the players part, or the judicial system, or all three?

For me, we collectively have to get a little more thick skinned, otherwise the next step is to segregate ever single contentious issue into separate threads ie Player B was cheating etc.
 
Bloody Nigel Owens. The more I read that match thread the angrier I get with him. He ruined it. He ruined the beautiful thread.....

While I do understand the reasoning behind the suggested 'reffing discussion' thread I feel it may be (a) difficult to enforce and (b) mean an important talking point is absent from the thread.

I do agree something should be done - the England/All Blacks thread was an embarrassment - so this may well be worth a go. I do feel the biggest issue in that thread was not the fact referee decisions were being discussed, rather a small minority of posters were either unable or unwilling to discuss them in a civilised manner. This off course wound up the (usually) resonable posters from one side, which in turn wound up the (usually) resonable posters from the other side. What resulted was that abomination of a match thread. Removing the more controversial parts of a match ( reffing decisions) may help in some way, but unless posters are mature enough to discuss in a civil manner it may not help. The victors will still be puffing up their chest a prancing around (while claiming they are being modest), while the losers will still claim they were robbed/food poisened/played poorly/ had too many injuries....

Sorry, went a bit off topic. I will stop ranting now. My view is it is worth a shot....

Nigel had blow Dane Coles...

Get it??
 
The problem with one thread for all refereeing discussions would be that there were 7 or 8 rugby internationals on the weekend. You can't have 7 games being talked about i one thread. I agree that there was hardly any quality discussion in the New Zealand vs England thread about the referee but I think a more strict stance could be taken against those who derail threads in a deliberate manner.

I guess if you want an example in Week 1 Worst XV I think Larksea, TRF Olyy and Mikel all made posts criticising the referee in a thread which was clearly not designed for that purpose. I would like to see a zero tolerance for that sort of thing with those posts deleted.
 
Last edited:
The problem with one thread for all refereeing discussions would be that there were 7 or 8 rugby internationals on the weekend. You can't have 7 games being talked about i one thread. I agree that there was hardly any quality discussion in the New Zealand vs England thread about the referee but I think a more strict stance could be taken against those who derail threads in a deliberate manner.

I guess if you want an example in Week 1 Worst XV I think Larksea, TRF Olyy and Mikel all made posts criticising the referee in a thread which was clearly not designed for that purpose. I would like to see a zero tolerance for that sort of thing with those posts deleted.

There was plenty of civil discussion on that thread until the "justice for Coles" brigade started smearing their muck all over the walls.

Comparing that to what olly et al said in the worst XV thread is disingenuous at best.

The crux of it is these EOYT times bring out the best of the trolls, they have no domestic rugby to keep them occupied so the international threads get it... We just all need to behave. Simple.
 

Latest posts

Top