It seems that after every Superleague round there are atleast one set of supporters unhappy at a referee's performance. Nothing new there really.

However, most of the gripes I've seen this past couple of years tend to be aimed at the consistency of refereeing, some supporters even accusing referee's of bias.

Is it time to follow the NRL and have two referees for Superleague games? Would this solve the problem? Would having two ref's make for more accurate and consistent decisions?

For those that follow the NRL, would you say the two referee system has worked/failed, and has the game over there changed as a result?

The obvious barrier to bringing this is the cost of employing x amount of new full-time referees, but if SL/RFL had the money available, would you be in favour?

As long as they wear hats.

Everyone should wear hats, or a medallion if your head doesn't allow for hat wearing.

Don't ruin my thread you gormgoose (although I agree that referees should wear hats. Bowler hats would be my preference).

Yes it is. One man can not see what is going on at the ruck and be able to see who is offside at the same time. .....Well I suppose you could but they would need to have eyes that are more boggled then the surgeon who performed my vaesactomy.

Those lightbulb hats from the Olympic closing ceremony would be ace, let's have those.
AND they may assist in seeing better? More light on the subject, as it were.
I'm not sure we need 2 refs. I am sure the ones we have need to be more consistent in their application of the rules, have to be able to count to 5 (not all of them can, seemingly) and the linesmen should be more prepeared to put their flags up for forward passing etc, because they just don't seem d at all. As much as I like the one who looks like a chuckle brother, I'm not sure his eyesight is all that.

I don't think we have the resources, either in terms of finances or personnel, to introduce seven new referees to the super league system. I think it would be helpful, however, if the linesmen were given more responsibility. Given that they position themselves at either end of the defensive line most of the time, they're in a perfect position to take charge of policing offside. This would allow the ref to stand at the play the ball.

Two referees means twice the inconsistency.

All the St Helens games have two referees already, the designated official and Paul Wellens. Wigan have gone a step further by implementing the 3 official ruling, the designated official, Ratboy and Brett Finch. It's not helped Wigan much recently, and Mike Rush still wasn't happy after Sundays defeat depite having Thierry Alibert, 2 touch judges, 2 in goal officials AND Paul Wellens. Some people eh ?

yes, but they don't have Gary and Kevin, do they?

Notice you cleverly chose to exclude the main culprit in SL for refereeing and playing the game in Mr Sinfield though??



As for 2 referees, I think it is the next step, although at the moment there arent enough good referees to cover 1 per game let alone 2. I think the RFL need to further invest in developing referees if they are going to have 2 per game. Maybe even employing enough full time referees so that any underperforming referees are demoted to the championship could be a good start?

Two referees are old-hat. Down under they're considering coaches challenges, and introducing it in the Toyota Cup next year I believe. Coach gets a few opportunities a game to challenge a referee decision(or non decision, ie something a ref missing in play), with referees looking at replays in the same way they would a possible try. Similar to what they've got in NFL and other sports.

Maybe we'll see it in the SL in 5 years

Or Adam Pearson and Peter Gentle !

Touched a nerve did I?

Change the word two for better or new

Made no difference to getting the right calls in the nrl and often creates problems. Don't go there!

We don't need to introduce 7 new officials when at 5 matches a week there are two touch judges, two in goal offficials and a ref. Get rid of the in goal officials bring one in as the other ref.

It's the consistency that missing, the refs have to agree on how their going to ref the games.

The more alarming issue is the video ref's.

One ref or two, im not sure it matters. Ive always maintained we'd get better value out of a video ref at every game and coach/captains challenge, similar to cricket.

Games are being won and lost on the refs call and it appears that club officials, fans and some pundits arent happy with the standard of referring in the game.

Take our game at Wire earlier in the season - we lost due to a huge refereeing blunder and that potentially could be the difference between making the top 8 and missing out...missing out goes against us on the licencing criteria and there is your knock on effect of a bad call.

With a coaches/captains challenge, we could, for example, have asked for a review of how many tackles were in that set and subsequently have the decision revoked.

Reviews and video referees ensure a little more clarity and highlight refereeing errors, this in turn gives the RFL/the officials no option but to get better at what they do.

Id still like a referees press conference too. An opportunity for the referee to justify his actions and to give his opinion on how he saw a particular incident. This is a concept that would never happen, but it would be interesting to see who has the best knowledge of the rules and in turn the more a referee demonstrates their competency, they more they will be respected.

Cricket, tennis and the NFL all have natural breaks between one play and the next where decisions can be challenged. Unless you're talking specifically about challenging decisions that create a stoppage,then RL doesn't.

Two referees:
Sinfield/ Wellens, both usually have more than enough input on matchdays and for the nightmare scenario
Alibert and Child, with Klein as VR, ouch !

For all the stick Klein got when he was here, he could still do a better job now in SL than most of the incompetent buffons refereeing this season. As someone pointed out on another thread, it's a sad state of affairs when you class Ganson as one of the better refs.

2 Issues for me:

It would just add another level of inconsistency, at least now although there may be inconsistency between games, there is a general level of consistency within any given match (For example - Different refs marshal the offside differently but generally do the same all game, 2 refs would give 2 different interpretations within the same 80 minutes)

Secondly, where would the referees come from? The next set of most qualified referees in the country are in the Championships, and believe me, if you think SL has a problem you aint seen nothing yet. Taking those refs from the Championships would then see those leagues getting the even lesser qualified and experienced officials.

I am always in favour of inovation that will improve our game, The big but is are we missing the point when we critisize the referee? I suspect it is the way the games are controlled & the interpretations that baffle us most. To me there seems to be a greater effort to speed up & keep the game flowing than to enforce the rules.
In this way we have numerous penalties at the tackle for interference when players are unsure if the tackle is incomplete. We get hardly any for moving off the mark or not playing the ball correctly.
The RFL need to find out what we actualy want & regulate accordingly not what Cummings feels like implementing.
For me the tackle should not be called held untill the ball carrying arm hits the ground or the player is lifted off the ground. In the play the ball the ball should be placed on the ground & played backwards with the foot & penalised everytime it is not. Finaly the ref should stop coaching the players if they take a tap on the 20 dont tell them to wait untill their own players are back on side penalise them. Dont warn players they know the rules just penalise them.

You can't give a penalty from a penalty kick

We don't need to appoint 7 more full-time ref's, 3 would be enough (5 pairs). The reduction in running the ref would do each game would mean they could officiate 2 games a weekend. Friday/Sunday, Friday/Monday, Saturday/Monday.

Regarding the different interpretations - that's the problem. Referee's should be interpreting the laws of the game in the same way, set out in a clear directive at the start of the season (and monitored) by Cummings. It's pretty obvious that this is also a big factor into the inconsistencies too.

Have the NRL experienced inconsistencies between the two ref's during games? I'm not sure.

The ref's effectively seen their scope of responsibility cut in half, and allows them to focus on one thing. For instance, at the moment the ref is sxpected to make sure the defensive line is 10m back, the markers are square and the PTB all in a short space of time.

The argument for the touch judges to get involved more is a very good one.