WHO’S THE BOSS
SEND-OFF DEBATE
FEW beat the “refs are only human drum” more than myself.
I can play it to practically any tune. Yet it’s the ultimate double-edged sword. If you are allowed to make mistakes due to your “human qualities”, you surely also are open to critique – like everyone else.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not condoning a witch-hunt. Far from it.
What I’d love is a system in which mistakes are corrected. If a few egos get bruised along the way, well, that’s just collateral damage in my books.
The Twitteratti blew up in response to Ricky Stuart’s latest one-man brain combustion performance. Sadly, many seem to miss the point.
It’s not about “giving journos a week’s worth of stories” or “slapping him with another $10,000 fine”. Sure, those things could become a reality.
Yet what about actually listening to the bloke? Maybe, just maybe, he represents the frustrations of fans everywhere. That’s not to say we have to employ every response offered. But just because Stuart shoots off his mouth more than a boxer doesn’t mean he makes any less sense. If controlled properly, by which I mean officials are shown the same respect as any player or coach postmatch, why can’t referees be asked a few questions at a media conference?
After all, what is the ambition here? Is it to protect the egos of those who make mistakes? Or is it to ensure there is transparency surrounding rules and those who implement them can outline exactly how they are doing so?
I know which answer most fans crave.
IN theory, there’s little wrong with coaches having the right to critique the performances of referees, just as they would their own players.
But as with many ideas that are good in theory, this fails in practice.
Coaches are under enormous pressure. They live and die by their results and giving them a green light to say anything about the performance of referees in a press conference just minutes after their team has come off the field is a recipe for disaster.
Referees must be accountable for their decisions but there is a process for this through the referees’ boss – and through the media, who will jump on a howler such as Matt
Cecchin’s decision not to send of Sia Soliola for his late, high hit on Billy Slater on Saturday. Referees’ boss Tony Archer responded quickly on Saturday, releasing a statement saying the player should have been sent off. If his quick reaction is a sign of a new era of transparency, that can only be good for the game.
Hefty fines are in place for coaches who criticise the referees and for good reason. Respect in the officials cannot be undermined. Who draws the line if open criticism is allowed? Is there any doubt that some coaches would use the licence to deflect attention from poor performances? And would players then be free to join in, endlessly questioning decisions on field? There has to be a balance. Officials must answer to someone, but that is not a cranky coach.