a penalty try: 7 points + yellow card is waaaaay to harsh. I think it should be 5 points + conversion from where penalty was commited and no yellow card unless it was a dangerous offence
1. Bring back the concept of "straight down", so players can drop a ball again without the game being stopped for more replays and scrums - and so that more tries can be awarded. Because these days ANY dropped ball is deemed a "knock on", and any separation is deemed "no try"... which is just silly. If the ball went straight down (i.e. when it is not clear and obvious that it went forward out of the hands) then play on / award the try! Because why on earth not? 2. Reduce the powers of the TMO - especially to stop this anti-climatic trend of going 5 phases back after every second try to look for reasons NOT to award the try. If something minor was missed, tough! If something major was missed, then the referee(s) must be held accountable later. We need a situation where 95%+ of tries are awarded on the field when the ref blows his whistle, so that fans can celebrate without hesitation - instead of waiting to see if there is a review (which has become the new reality). Rather give each captain 1 or 2 appeals per half (or something like that) to review on-field decisions if they think a mistake was made. 3. Allow a player to propel himself forward on his knee(s) ONCE in order to place the ball when scoring a try (i.e. still no crawling, but stop disallowing tries because a knee was on the ground when they reached to place the ball). 4. Allow "coupling up" for the attacking player again (where a team mate attaches to him to help give him momentum in contact), because we constantly see 2 defenders on one attacking player... but the attacking team aren't allowed the same privilege. So now it's far harder to make a physical break-through on attack - especially close to the line. It will also help to make it harder for defences, because then they can't just focus on individual players... they must consider who could suddenly form a battering ram. 5. Appoint some retired international coaches, like Steve Hansen - who argued for a simplification of the rugby laws for years - to go through the rugby laws and come up with suggestions on how to simplify them - for comment by the other top coaches and RECENTLY retired players (like McCaw, Matfield, etc. who understand the modern game - as opposed to people like Campese, Stransky, etc). Because the process of adapting / simplifying rugby laws should NOT be led by administrators and referees... That gives you a refereeing show - which is what rugby is now.
Mack Hansen was particularly talking about the blatant Barrett shoulder in to Aki's head, which not only did the ref refused to revue, but was replayed for everyone to see, the TMO was either asleep or incompetent or worse, either way all the official's ignored it. Fans from both sides agree that Barrett should have been red carded. Even the commentator's were amazed that this was let go. I am a Leinster fan and I have no doubt this should have been the case. Instead, the TMO and ref scrutinised Connacht's infringements. This was a game changing moment at the start of the match. Instead Barrett plays on and was so good he got man of the match. Do Leinster get away with more than other teams? yes they do as do all the top teams, as the AB's got away with for generations, why? Mack is not wrong, he was calling out the obvious.
@@lmarislmarislmaris4271 rassie wasn't banned for a year! he received several different bans at different times for the same stupid crap over and over again . He was banned for 2 months! and after his stupid twitter rant he received a further 10 month match-day involvement ban. WHICH was not a ban from rugby, he just wasn't allowed to go to the games... kinda like you would punish a brat. At least he learned. Unlike fans who invent stuff thats not real, present it like its real and then other eedjits believe it. Sometimes youtube comments are like watching a group of drunks arguing for all the truth that you can expect from people like you in the comments
@lmarislmarislmaris4271 The two are streets apart, an hour long video critique on Nick Berry, versus an off the cuff 1 minute emotional rant. But of course you are entitled to your opinion
Excellent episode and really appreciative of Luke Pearce for confronting it all so honestly. However one thing on Mack Hansen and with the disappointment of Chris Busby calling it a day, it's easy to miss the point that what Hansen was saying is his perception that Connacht have had the rough end of referee's decisions over seasons - not just that game - and that is why he spoke as he did. As an Ulster fan I can say wholeheartedly that we too feel that Leinster get away with murder, I believe they are brilliantly coached by Niebenar and for many years by Cullen who learned a bag of tricks during his time at Welford Road with Tigers. Ulster played Leinster a couple of weeks before the Leinster v Connacht game and whilst second best Ulster had a 10 minute spell in the second half where it was constant defence for Leinster and they were living just the wrong side of offside constantly. How often were they penalised? Not once, and that is the frustration of how well Leinster "play" refs and how good I believe their coaching is to push EVERYTHING - hence Hansen's and other player's and fans frustration. I believe the better teams get the best of the calls, it's always been that way, dominance counts for a lot.
Also, rugby is becoming more and more of a refereeing show... In the past the referees were in the background, but now they are mic'd up, constantly talking/coaching, TMO's getting involved, with the game being stopped multiple times so referees can talk and go over (and over) replays... to the point where we can't even celebrate a try anymore, because you know we first have to go 5 phases back to see if the ball didn't leave the scrum-halves hands for a split second, potentially going 1 cm forward... So the question has to be asked: how can fans/players/coaches be expected to NOT question and criticise refereeing? Because it is constantly being shoved in our faces... and so many of the laws / interpretations inherently don't feel fair.
Completely agree with this, and have left a comment on the video myself, with the increased importance of involvement of referees SHOULD come increased opinions. Healthy criticism is the only way for positive change to happen, if players or coaches abuse referees then they should face the full force of their respective union or World Rugby, but criticism of decisions should not be silenced.
I think it should be worth pointing out that it’s the coaches and TV broadcasters that have asked for the referee to be far more centre of attention. The coaches have asked that every decision be analysed to ensure the correct decision is given at all points, irrelevant of how that impacts the flow of the game or the overall spectacle. For the pro coaches, they would rather the game had 50 penalties and everything was picked up, then the game was left to flow. From the broadcaster’s point of view, to increase understanding for the average spectator they have asked the Referees microphone so that their decisions can be clear, understood and explained to the general Rugby public . Rugby is found itself in this weird position where we want Referees to be 100% accurate all of the time but also allow the game to flow. These two things cannot happen at the same time as they are completely contradicting each other. Either we accept that the odd knock on might get missed, the odd forward pass might be ignored but much better tries as a scored or every decision needs to be examined with a microscope.
I could be mistaken and I'd appreciate if someone who's more familiar with the laws could clarify but I don't think they can go back more than two phases to check anything with the TMO.
Nobody is perfect. Referees are human too. Instead of retiring Chris Busby could have just held his hands up and said sorry guys i made a mistake not looking at the tackle on Bundee closer and I will learn from that in future.
It sucks to have decisions go against you.HOWEVER,It has always been in rugby and served as one of the many life lessons that rugby teaches you and molds good character.Teaches you to not be a whiny bitch when things dont go your way and to keep persevering ESPECIALLY when things go against you.
Whether we disagree with some of their decisions or not, the refs do a great job in pretty unenviable circumstances. As in every profession, some are better practitioners than others but over-all, the standard of refereeing is far higher today than it was in the 'good old days'. TMO's are another matter, as a spectator there is nothing more annoying than a TMO bring play back for a minor infringement that then takes ages to sort. Constant low-level interruption by TMO's kills the game as a viewing spectacle. It was reassuring to hear Luke Pearces discuss his view on the role of the TMO, hopefully it's reflective of the views of the entire refereeing body as we head into the 6 Nations.
I get that many of the different levels of rugby utilise different levels of officiating teams and technology, but one of my pet hates as a coach and referee, is that rugby at school, club and representative levels all use different subsets of the law book. So the spectator at large is often bemused by a decision because they saw it officiated differently in a different context or competition. I would love for their to be fewer trial laws and variations. If a decision is made to adjust the law book, have this happen throughout.
I think it's right to expect players and coaches to deliver any criticism of the referee(s) internally, through the correct channels - and for there to be consequences if they don't. But commentators should have a bit more freedom to question clear and obvious refereeing mistakes - e.g. a blatant forward pass that was missed - because everyone at home can see it. And fans should have the most freedom to question refereeing calls, because that forms part of discussing the game (in any sport). However, there is a difference between questioning refereeing calls and attacking the referee personally - and that's where the line should be drawn, and where fan education should be focussed. But it seems like ANY criticism aimed at refereeing (even if it is just questioning their decisions) is now deemed taboo... and that's not right. It comes with the territory - and players and coaches are also subject to it. So referees should expect and accept a certain amount of criticism (of their performance).
WR must get their house in order. If players and coaches felt there was a way to approach WR and discuss issues, in a way that they would feel heard, things at WR were transparent, you wouldn't get players and coacher going at it like this and presses etc. The problem sits squarely on WR boardroom and their failings to address concerns, just constantly kicking the can the down road, constantly changing the rules, but never addressing failures to properly enforce them, been a boiling pot for close on two decades now.
Rassie showed WR will crucify those from certain countries who follow proper channels but if you're from a 'most favored nation' player, they will use kid gloves.
The TMO input in the WC final was an example of excessive input and influence on a game. I actually felt sorry for Wayne Barnes. His authority over the game was diminished by incessant interjections by the TMO. You could tell he was getting exasperated by it.
Great to hear Luke talking about this, I think you are brave to do this video, but great, not easy job being a ref, everyone on the pitch can makes mistakes including refs, changing rules so fast , good for safety and getting money into the game we all love but hard for all, (Luke - hope you dont get sanctioned by the mysterious WRU for "saying things", really I mean that.)
He sent a PRIVATE communication to World Rugby. Nic Berry shared it then played the victim. Rassie served a longer ban and far higher fine than Sexton & Hansen combined. They stalked and made PUBLIC statements with virtually NO consequences. These two should have faced at least as severe penalties, but you seem okay with that.
@@lmarislmarislmaris4271 rassies served SEVERAL bans on top of each other cos he couldn't keep his mouth shut after a 2 month ban! Also he was banned from MATCH day appearances. NOT BANNED from rugby. stop inventing things. bloody hell place is full of liars/dum dums.
Stop protecting the scrum half's. The nip n tuck of harrying the scrum half is one of the spectacles if the game . Bring it back. Just another excuse to blow the whistle.
Really enjoyed this chat, thanks guys. Luke makes plenty of sense, but I do disagree on one point. I think ref should be god with a whistle, and the players shouldn't be allowed to show any dissent during the game. A little more leeway for public criticism after the game seems fine to me, but not blatantly insinuating the refs a flog like Hansen did. All rugby fans should have some knowledge of how hard the game is to officiate, and I think it's up to the players, superstars of the sport, to educate them on that, rather than refs, cos that's who the fans listen to. Fwiw, I'm concerned about refs at all levels getting bombarded with rubbish during games and think they should be stricter on backchat and questioning
I don't disagree with the sport for limiting the public airing of grievances against match officials... but why bring the players out to the media then. Like, I think what Mack said was right, thought as I was watching the game (munster fan) but I don't think he was right to say it. If this is what we want, then we should never bring him out. He wears his heart on his sleeve, and you're just setting him up to fail.
Referees are too ready to coach teams, particularly at the breakdown, and by default, they are removing their impartiality by themselves. Referees aren’t being measured to the same standards as players and it’s entirely correct that World Rugby will be required to address the rapidly falling standards of officiating. There are standout appalling refereeing performances such as the 2011 RWC Final when France were refereed out the match, Joubert enough said, Nic Berry enough said, Alan Rolland……
The idea that increased scrutiny and accountability makes things better is misplaced, all it does is increase the pressure on the refs and make them a bigger part of the game, the game is full of calls that could go one way or another so what ever the outcome one set of fans are always unhappy. One of the joys of watching the game in person not on the TV is the reduced time spent thinking about the officials, both sets of fans think the ref was shit but don't actually care that much because you haven't had 100 slow mo replays from every angle thrust upon you and the commentators critiquing every possible minor infringement. The game would be a more enjoyable spectacle if broadcasters chose to focus on other aspects of the game and took the officials out of the spotlight
The best referees available are the ones currently doing the job, if you create an environment where they are not comfortable and leave the replacements will be of a lower standard, there aren't hoards of world class refs waiting in the wings so we need to look after the ones we've got and put them un the best position possible to get on with the job. Mr Pierce mentioned in the video that they are held accountable by his organisation which is how it should be, not by the general public or media outlets. Over the years football has increased their scrutiny of match officials and I have yet to see the resulting improvement of refereeing on the pitch or the benefits to the viewing experience.
@ I completely disagree, in the national leagues, championship and premiership have truly world class referees, and I am sure this is the case globally, if a player has a bad few games, they are benched or dropped from the match day squad, why should this be different for referees, they are professional sport arbiters. In the same way you say “there aren’t hoards of referees waiting in the wings”, you mentioned football. There aren’t “hoards of referees” leaving football just because of the higher scrutiny, and I am yet to see the detriment of refereeing quality due to this increased criticism.
I see you’ve released the chimp. What a shambles Haskel is. Ffs he’s a total joke but not funny. Come on lads get rid of him the show is so much better without
Some of us love him please understand that some people are here just for him Hask is a very misunderstood guy. He is funny and his level of intelligence is interesting too.
@@GoodBadRugby Yeah, I imagine it's every woman's dream to be appraised as a "rocket" by James Haskell esq. I imagine he'll be throwing fists in the future when other immature forever man-child grunts like himself treat his daughter with the same pathetic attitude. Maybe some comments need to end up on the cutting room floor - it's not a good look. Always thought Haskell was a ____. Changed my mind for a while, then realised I shouldn't have. But he seems popular on the decks so who am I to argue with all the mindless morons who pay to see him press a few buttons in a vest.
there is also rugby culture to consider on a world wide basis, IE france south africa like the big pack scrum and mauls etc, while pacific nations like a faster game, so no issues with different but minor rules per league, eg france have different rules for replacement vs internationals so champs cup should play to their culture and rule set but international another but the difference should be minor!
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
What laws would you change to simplify rugby?
a penalty try: 7 points + yellow card is waaaaay to harsh. I think it should be 5 points + conversion from where penalty was commited and no yellow card unless it was a dangerous offence
1. Bring back the concept of "straight down", so players can drop a ball again without the game being stopped for more replays and scrums - and so that more tries can be awarded. Because these days ANY dropped ball is deemed a "knock on", and any separation is deemed "no try"... which is just silly. If the ball went straight down (i.e. when it is not clear and obvious that it went forward out of the hands) then play on / award the try! Because why on earth not?
2. Reduce the powers of the TMO - especially to stop this anti-climatic trend of going 5 phases back after every second try to look for reasons NOT to award the try. If something minor was missed, tough! If something major was missed, then the referee(s) must be held accountable later. We need a situation where 95%+ of tries are awarded on the field when the ref blows his whistle, so that fans can celebrate without hesitation - instead of waiting to see if there is a review (which has become the new reality). Rather give each captain 1 or 2 appeals per half (or something like that) to review on-field decisions if they think a mistake was made.
3. Allow a player to propel himself forward on his knee(s) ONCE in order to place the ball when scoring a try (i.e. still no crawling, but stop disallowing tries because a knee was on the ground when they reached to place the ball).
4. Allow "coupling up" for the attacking player again (where a team mate attaches to him to help give him momentum in contact), because we constantly see 2 defenders on one attacking player... but the attacking team aren't allowed the same privilege. So now it's far harder to make a physical break-through on attack - especially close to the line. It will also help to make it harder for defences, because then they can't just focus on individual players... they must consider who could suddenly form a battering ram.
5. Appoint some retired international coaches, like Steve Hansen - who argued for a simplification of the rugby laws for years - to go through the rugby laws and come up with suggestions on how to simplify them - for comment by the other top coaches and RECENTLY retired players (like McCaw, Matfield, etc. who understand the modern game - as opposed to people like Campese, Stransky, etc). Because the process of adapting / simplifying rugby laws should NOT be led by administrators and referees... That gives you a refereeing show - which is what rugby is now.
What a great discussion.
That is the nicest south African accent I've ever heard😊
🧂
Mack Hansen was particularly talking about the blatant Barrett shoulder in to Aki's head, which not only did the ref refused to revue, but was replayed for everyone to see, the TMO was either asleep or incompetent or worse, either way all the official's ignored it. Fans from both sides agree that Barrett should have been red carded. Even the commentator's were amazed that this was let go. I am a Leinster fan and I have no doubt this should have been the case. Instead, the TMO and ref scrutinised Connacht's infringements. This was a game changing moment at the start of the match. Instead Barrett plays on and was so good he got man of the match. Do Leinster get away with more than other teams? yes they do as do all the top teams, as the AB's got away with for generations, why? Mack is not wrong, he was calling out the obvious.
Should have been banned for a year as Rassie was.
@@lmarislmarislmaris4271 rassie wasn't banned for a year! he received several different bans at different times for the same stupid crap over and over again .
He was banned for 2 months! and after his stupid twitter rant he received a further 10 month match-day involvement ban. WHICH was not a ban from rugby, he just wasn't allowed to go to the games... kinda like you would punish a brat. At least he learned. Unlike fans who invent stuff thats not real, present it like its real and then other eedjits believe it.
Sometimes youtube comments are like watching a group of drunks arguing for all the truth that you can expect from people like you in the comments
@lmarislmarislmaris4271 The two are streets apart, an hour long video critique on Nick Berry, versus an off the cuff 1 minute emotional rant. But of course you are entitled to your opinion
Excellent episode and really appreciative of Luke Pearce for confronting it all so honestly. However one thing on Mack Hansen and with the disappointment of Chris Busby calling it a day, it's easy to miss the point that what Hansen was saying is his perception that Connacht have had the rough end of referee's decisions over seasons - not just that game - and that is why he spoke as he did. As an Ulster fan I can say wholeheartedly that we too feel that Leinster get away with murder, I believe they are brilliantly coached by Niebenar and for many years by Cullen who learned a bag of tricks during his time at Welford Road with Tigers. Ulster played Leinster a couple of weeks before the Leinster v Connacht game and whilst second best Ulster had a 10 minute spell in the second half where it was constant defence for Leinster and they were living just the wrong side of offside constantly. How often were they penalised? Not once, and that is the frustration of how well Leinster "play" refs and how good I believe their coaching is to push EVERYTHING - hence Hansen's and other player's and fans frustration. I believe the better teams get the best of the calls, it's always been that way, dominance counts for a lot.
Yep, I'm fairly certain Connaught and Ulster get shafted by the IRFU
@@henryburton6529 cry babies.
the early 2000s ,2010 all blacks rarely get penalised annoyed a lot!
Also, rugby is becoming more and more of a refereeing show... In the past the referees were in the background, but now they are mic'd up, constantly talking/coaching, TMO's getting involved, with the game being stopped multiple times so referees can talk and go over (and over) replays... to the point where we can't even celebrate a try anymore, because you know we first have to go 5 phases back to see if the ball didn't leave the scrum-halves hands for a split second, potentially going 1 cm forward... So the question has to be asked: how can fans/players/coaches be expected to NOT question and criticise refereeing? Because it is constantly being shoved in our faces... and so many of the laws / interpretations inherently don't feel fair.
It’s similar in football/soccer as well, probably other sports too
Completely agree with this, and have left a comment on the video myself, with the increased importance of involvement of referees SHOULD come increased opinions. Healthy criticism is the only way for positive change to happen, if players or coaches abuse referees then they should face the full force of their respective union or World Rugby, but criticism of decisions should not be silenced.
I think it should be worth pointing out that it’s the coaches and TV broadcasters that have asked for the referee to be far more centre of attention.
The coaches have asked that every decision be analysed to ensure the correct decision is given at all points, irrelevant of how that impacts the flow of the game or the overall spectacle. For the pro coaches, they would rather the game had 50 penalties and everything was picked up, then the game was left to flow.
From the broadcaster’s point of view, to increase understanding for the average spectator they have asked the Referees microphone so that their decisions can be clear, understood and explained to the general Rugby public .
Rugby is found itself in this weird position where we want Referees to be 100% accurate all of the time but also allow the game to flow. These two things cannot happen at the same time as they are completely contradicting each other. Either we accept that the odd knock on might get missed, the odd forward pass might be ignored but much better tries as a scored or every decision needs to be examined with a microscope.
I could be mistaken and I'd appreciate if someone who's more familiar with the laws could clarify but I don't think they can go back more than two phases to check anything with the TMO.
@@WSEightyFour they shouldn't but they do. Did it in the rwc23 final no less
Nobody is perfect. Referees are human too. Instead of retiring Chris Busby could have just held his hands up and said sorry guys i made a mistake not looking at the tackle on Bundee closer and I will learn from that in future.
It sucks to have decisions go against you.HOWEVER,It has always been in rugby and served as one of the many life lessons that rugby teaches you and molds good character.Teaches you to not be a whiny bitch when things dont go your way and to keep persevering ESPECIALLY when things go against you.
Obviously, not been to a grassroots game recently then!! Great Discussion, Great Podcast, Enjoyed this one a lot!!
Love this week’s so much 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Thank you! Luke was a real gent to work with.
Whether we disagree with some of their decisions or not, the refs do a great job in pretty unenviable circumstances. As in every profession, some are better practitioners than others but over-all, the standard of refereeing is far higher today than it was in the 'good old days'. TMO's are another matter, as a spectator there is nothing more annoying than a TMO bring play back for a minor infringement that then takes ages to sort. Constant low-level interruption by TMO's kills the game as a viewing spectacle. It was reassuring to hear Luke Pearces discuss his view on the role of the TMO, hopefully it's reflective of the views of the entire refereeing body as we head into the 6 Nations.
I get that many of the different levels of rugby utilise different levels of officiating teams and technology, but one of my pet hates as a coach and referee, is that rugby at school, club and representative levels all use different subsets of the law book. So the spectator at large is often bemused by a decision because they saw it officiated differently in a different context or competition. I would love for their to be fewer trial laws and variations. If a decision is made to adjust the law book, have this happen throughout.
I think it's right to expect players and coaches to deliver any criticism of the referee(s) internally, through the correct channels - and for there to be consequences if they don't. But commentators should have a bit more freedom to question clear and obvious refereeing mistakes - e.g. a blatant forward pass that was missed - because everyone at home can see it. And fans should have the most freedom to question refereeing calls, because that forms part of discussing the game (in any sport). However, there is a difference between questioning refereeing calls and attacking the referee personally - and that's where the line should be drawn, and where fan education should be focussed. But it seems like ANY criticism aimed at refereeing (even if it is just questioning their decisions) is now deemed taboo... and that's not right. It comes with the territory - and players and coaches are also subject to it. So referees should expect and accept a certain amount of criticism (of their performance).
WR must get their house in order.
If players and coaches felt there was a way to approach WR and discuss issues, in a way that they would feel heard, things at WR were transparent, you wouldn't get players and coacher going at it like this and presses etc.
The problem sits squarely on WR boardroom and their failings to address concerns, just constantly kicking the can the down road, constantly changing the rules, but never addressing failures to properly enforce them, been a boiling pot for close on two decades now.
Rassie showed WR will crucify those from certain countries who follow proper channels but if you're from a 'most favored nation' player, they will use kid gloves.
Putting the ball in straight, please.
The TMO input in the WC final was an example of excessive input and influence on a game. I actually felt sorry for Wayne Barnes. His authority over the game was diminished by incessant interjections by the TMO. You could tell he was getting exasperated by it.
Come on Luke you cannot try to blame Hansen for online abuse.
I completely disagree
Good discussion fellas
Haskell on the columbian marching powder? jesus what a bombastic start to a podcast, nearly switched off. luke pearce excellent
Definitely putting the ball in strait at the scrum.
The Laws are far too open to interpretation.
Great to hear Luke talking about this, I think you are brave to do this video, but great, not easy job being a ref, everyone on the pitch can makes mistakes including refs, changing rules so fast , good for safety and getting money into the game we all love but hard for all, (Luke - hope you dont get sanctioned by the mysterious WRU for "saying things", really I mean that.)
First 3 minutes was quality
Players and coaches publicly attacking refs will be the end of our game.
Rassie should've received a lifetime ban for his egregious selfish actions
pure exaggeration.
He sent a PRIVATE communication to World Rugby. Nic Berry shared it then played the victim. Rassie served a longer ban and far higher fine than Sexton & Hansen combined. They stalked and made PUBLIC statements with virtually NO consequences. These two should have faced at least as severe penalties, but you seem okay with that.
@@lmarislmarislmaris4271 rassies served SEVERAL bans on top of each other cos he couldn't keep his mouth shut after a 2 month ban! Also he was banned from MATCH day appearances. NOT BANNED from rugby. stop inventing things. bloody hell place is full of liars/dum dums.
👌 lets give the ref a rating after every game.
Stop protecting the scrum half's. The nip n tuck of harrying the scrum half is one of the spectacles if the game . Bring it back. Just another excuse to blow the whistle.
Really enjoyed this chat, thanks guys. Luke makes plenty of sense, but I do disagree on one point. I think ref should be god with a whistle, and the players shouldn't be allowed to show any dissent during the game. A little more leeway for public criticism after the game seems fine to me, but not blatantly insinuating the refs a flog like Hansen did.
All rugby fans should have some knowledge of how hard the game is to officiate, and I think it's up to the players, superstars of the sport, to educate them on that, rather than refs, cos that's who the fans listen to.
Fwiw, I'm concerned about refs at all levels getting bombarded with rubbish during games and think they should be stricter on backchat and questioning
Lovely nails Hask!
I don't disagree with the sport for limiting the public airing of grievances against match officials... but why bring the players out to the media then. Like, I think what Mack said was right, thought as I was watching the game (munster fan) but I don't think he was right to say it.
If this is what we want, then we should never bring him out. He wears his heart on his sleeve, and you're just setting him up to fail.
Very interesting person and his views on continual law changes. The famous comment KISS Keep it Simple Stupid.
Class act is luke pearce
If Hansen was South African he would have been banned for three years.
Referees are too ready to coach teams, particularly at the breakdown, and by default, they are removing their impartiality by themselves.
Referees aren’t being measured to the same standards as players and it’s entirely correct that World Rugby will be required to address the rapidly falling standards of officiating.
There are standout appalling refereeing performances such as the 2011 RWC Final when France were refereed out the match, Joubert enough said, Nic Berry enough said, Alan Rolland……
lads, ENG squad thoughts when?
Talk about equivocating. Come on Luke, give an opinion.
Why can't players critise refs ?
The idea that increased scrutiny and accountability makes things better is misplaced, all it does is increase the pressure on the refs and make them a bigger part of the game, the game is full of calls that could go one way or another so what ever the outcome one set of fans are always unhappy. One of the joys of watching the game in person not on the TV is the reduced time spent thinking about the officials, both sets of fans think the ref was shit but don't actually care that much because you haven't had 100 slow mo replays from every angle thrust upon you and the commentators critiquing every possible minor infringement. The game would be a more enjoyable spectacle if broadcasters chose to focus on other aspects of the game and took the officials out of the spotlight
Indeed
The best referees available are the ones currently doing the job, if you create an environment where they are not comfortable and leave the replacements will be of a lower standard, there aren't hoards of world class refs waiting in the wings so we need to look after the ones we've got and put them un the best position possible to get on with the job. Mr Pierce mentioned in the video that they are held accountable by his organisation which is how it should be, not by the general public or media outlets. Over the years football has increased their scrutiny of match officials and I have yet to see the resulting improvement of refereeing on the pitch or the benefits to the viewing experience.
@ I completely disagree, in the national leagues, championship and premiership have truly world class referees, and I am sure this is the case globally, if a player has a bad few games, they are benched or dropped from the match day squad, why should this be different for referees, they are professional sport arbiters. In the same way you say “there aren’t hoards of referees waiting in the wings”, you mentioned football. There aren’t “hoards of referees” leaving football just because of the higher scrutiny, and I am yet to see the detriment of refereeing quality due to this increased criticism.
I see you’ve released the chimp. What a shambles Haskel is. Ffs he’s a total joke but not funny. Come on lads get rid of him the show is so much better without
Some of us love him please understand that some people are here just for him Hask is a very misunderstood guy. He is funny and his level of intelligence is interesting too.
I respect your opinion, I disagree with it but that’s the joy. We can have different opinions.
@@mikeatherton3895yes sir let us disagree on that just don't ask them to get rid of him
Referees want to be the center of attention these days. It used to be a privilege for referees to share the field with the players.
Luke Pearce is an excellent referee and very articulate when speaking sense. Unfortunately Scotland have got Carley and Dickson in this years 6N 🤷♂️😂
Love Hask's energy😂😂😂
It's never dull at GBR HQ
@@GoodBadRugby Yeah, I imagine it's every woman's dream to be appraised as a "rocket" by James Haskell esq.
I imagine he'll be throwing fists in the future when other immature forever man-child grunts like himself treat his daughter with the same pathetic attitude.
Maybe some comments need to end up on the cutting room floor - it's not a good look.
Always thought Haskell was a ____. Changed my mind for a while, then realised I shouldn't have.
But he seems popular on the decks so who am I to argue with all the mindless morons who pay to see him press a few buttons in a vest.
Luke Pierce one of the better refs.ban all french refs 😅
Based on what? Xenophobic sentiment ? Childishness ?
Watch Hansen get pinged all over the shop from now on ha
there is also rugby culture to consider on a world wide basis, IE france south africa like the big pack scrum and mauls etc, while pacific nations like a faster game, so no issues with different but minor rules per league, eg france have different rules for replacement vs internationals so champs cup should play to their culture and rule set but international another but the difference should be minor!
unless you get a situation like spain vs belgium with the romanian referee! also didnt dupont trash the ref in a nicer way post world cup loss?
lol go watch french 2nd and 3rd division games and then complain lol!