Referee For Saturday Is.....

[cpwigan]

Steve, I agree with you re Cummings. He seems to tamper unecessarily and hence we get referees penalising whatever is issued in his latest edict. Maybe if the rules/interpretation were not tampered with so frequently we would get more consistency. The play of the ball with your foot was one example. There was nothing wrong with the rule that as long as you attempted to play the ball with the foot it was legal. To bring back, you had to touch it with your foot was a waste of time and offered zero benefit to the game.

[stevocod]

cpwigan posted:
Steve, I agree with you re Cummings. He seems to tamper unecessarily and hence we get referees penalising whatever is issued in his latest edict. Maybe if the rules/interpretation were not tampered with so frequently we would get more consistency. The play of the ball with your foot was one example. There was nothing wrong with the rule that as long as you attempted to play the ball with the foot it was legal. To bring back, you had to touch it with your foot was a waste of time and offered zero benefit to the game.

Well not his latest edict in your words, but every referees pet hate, which is their own interpretation and not Cummings and this is where professionalism has not brought about improvement, but more confusion across the board because the referees are not governed appropriately at the very top.

[robjoenz]

stevocod posted:

cpwigan posted:
Steve, I agree with you re Cummings. He seems to tamper unecessarily and hence we get referees penalising whatever is issued in his latest edict. Maybe if the rules/interpretation were not tampered with so frequently we would get more consistency. The play of the ball with your foot was one example. There was nothing wrong with the rule that as long as you attempted to play the ball with the foot it was legal. To bring back, you had to touch it with your foot was a waste of time and offered zero benefit to the game.

Well not his latest edict in your words, but every referees pet hate, which is their own interpretation and not Cummings and this is where professionalism has not brought about improvement, but more confusion across the board because the referees are not governed appropriately at the very top.

In the last ten round of SL then... what have been these different edicts from Cummings to clamp down on? There haven't been any. I have seen no penalties for incorrect play-the-balls and no penalties for other minor indiscretions that do not affect play. The only penalties I have seen are for repeat minor offences and stonewall offences.

[stevocod]

robjoenz posted:

stevocod posted:

cpwigan posted:
Steve, I agree with you re Cummings. He seems to tamper unecessarily and hence we get referees penalising whatever is issued in his latest edict. Maybe if the rules/interpretation were not tampered with so frequently we would get more consistency. The play of the ball with your foot was one example. There was nothing wrong with the rule that as long as you attempted to play the ball with the foot it was legal. To bring back, you had to touch it with your foot was a waste of time and offered zero benefit to the game.

Well not his latest edict in your words, but every referees pet hate, which is their own interpretation and not Cummings and this is where professionalism has not brought about improvement, but more confusion across the board because the referees are not governed appropriately at the very top.

In the last ten round of SL then... what have been these different edicts from Cummings to clamp down on? There haven't been any. I have seen no penalties for incorrect play-the-balls and no penalties for other minor indiscretions that do not affect play. The only penalties I have seen are for repeat minor offences and stonewall offences.

Rob???? Obviously wearing your refeering blinkers again then! My first words NOT LATEST EDICTS? Try reading first before critisising, even though i appreciate your very different angle on things, it does help if you read before immediately replying!!!

This is exactly my point NOT latest edicts, but referees on own judgement and no direction or help from the highest level, which is needed to improve referee performances. Stonewall offences? Like Hull in the first half infringing blatantly at the play of the ball?!

[robjoenz]

stevocod posted:
Rob????

Yes, it is I!

Apologies Stevocod, that message was aimed more at cpwigan that yourself regarding his comment about tampering with the rules.

This is exactly my point NOT latest edicts, but referees on own judgement and no direction or help from the highest level, which is needed to improve referee performances.

Referees obviously do use their own judgement but their judgement is based on guidance from the top. There is loads of guidance from the top at the RFL, training and video sessions for all levels of officials. As well as being encouraged to carry out self assessments after each game for which you get feedback either by email or by phone.

Stonewall offences? Like Hull in the first half infringing blatantly at the play of the ball?!

How am I meant to know what incident(s) you're talking about?


Going back to my point (to cpwigan); if you look at the last ten rounds of SL there have been less penalties overall and more consistency between referees and between individual decisions made by referees.

[stevocod]

robjoenz posted:

stevocod posted:
Rob????

Yes, it is I!

Apologies Stevocod, that message was aimed more at cpwigan that yourself regarding his comment about tampering with the rules.

That's fine, but you clicked on reply on my name, which is why I assumed you meant the reply to me!



[/quote]

[stevocod]

robjoenz posted:

Referees obviously do use their own judgement but their judgement is based on guidance from the top. There is loads of guidance from the top at the RFL, training and video sessions for all levels of officials. As well as being encouraged to carry out self assessments after each game for which you get feedback either by email or by phone.

Feedback? Yes but not discussed across the board of referees properly so there is some cohesive understanding amongst all of them.

How am I meant to know what incident(s) you're talking about?

The slowing down of the play of the ball in the first half by various tackling Hull players. Yes it stopped in the second half, but the referee was inconsistent in his judgement between halfs.

[robjoenz]

stevocod posted:
Feedback? Yes but not discussed across the board of referees properly so there is some cohesive understanding amongst all of them.

It is. Especially between the full time referees, they meet and discuss aspects of their game and aspects of the game in general.

The slowing down of the play of the ball in the first half by various tackling Hull players. Yes it stopped in the second half, but the referee was inconsistent in his judgement between halfs.

I didn't realise notice to be honest, I didn't think there were any major issues with the ruck. One thing we were discussing yesterday on the drive home was tackling technique. Watching Saints on Friday; some of their tackling is brilliant, similarly with Leeds. They lock a player up on his feet, then turn him and play him on his back. Wigan just don't seem to be as good at it. Locking players up isn't good enough (how often to opposition players make an offload?) and they try stabilising the player after he's been grounded which gives penalties away.

[stevocod]

robjoenz posted:

It is. Especially between the full time referees, they meet and discuss aspects of their game and aspects of the game in general.

Well this doesn't bring about an understanding within, that all of them agree to clamp down on specific things, they still penalise their own pet hates.

The slowing down of the play of the ball in the first half by various tackling Hull players. Yes it stopped in the second half, but the referee was inconsistent in his judgement between halfs.

I didn't realise notice to be honest, I didn't think there were any major issues with the ruck. One thing we were discussing yesterday on the drive home was tackling technique. Watching Saints on Friday; some of their tackling is brilliant, similarly with Leeds. They lock a player up on his feet, then turn him and play him on his back. Wigan just don't seem to be as good at it. Locking players up isn't good enough (how often to opposition players make an offload?) and they try stabilising the player after he's been grounded which gives penalties away.

Tackling technique is one thing we are lacking at the moment and i agree some Wigan players, particularly Hock, O'Loughlin and Ashton seriously lack.

I think sport in general is about simplyfing things as best as possible and in tackling i think one should go low and tackle ankles and if it's a big man then one round the ball to prevent the offload too.

Although in terms of defensive alignment St. Helens and Leeds do tend to be borderline offside at the play of the ball and constantly get away with it. Maybe they are good at it, but still it shouldn't happen.

The one thing with Saints and Leeds are their ability to run with speed from dummy half ala Burrow, Roby, Mcguire and Cunningham and I think Nobby has tried this with bringing Higham off the bench when a defense has tired, but it doesn't always work for us.

Possibly the reason for this is the amount of new players we have had in, in the past few seasons. I think the understanding between Leuluai, Barrett and the supporting centres need time and we have a good team on their day to beat anyone, i just feel we lack a prop to cover Feka and Fielden.[/quote]

[turf]

stevocod, don't tell me that Ashton is ANOTHER player who doesn't know any other method of how to tackle apart from to take people's heads off?!?!?! :sly: :sly: :sly: