Willie Barret - Referees Development Chairman

[yellowcard]

Imagine Nolan and let's say Gough refereeing in each half yesterday. You would have one referee trying to let the game flow and another blowing for free kicks that nobody else in the ground could see. It would be chaos and lead to even more confusion. I really don't think this would be a good idea it would just lead to inconsistencies within the same match rather than from match to match.

[Esmarelda]

I don't think we need two refs. We need to use the other 7 officials that are supposed to be helping to run the game. They are all mic'ed up, so let the umpires, linesmen and fourth official advise the referee of off the ball frees etc.

Off the ball frees are one thing, but a tackle being made so far from the ref that he is effectively guessing is a big problem.

The two linesmen at that level are referees. Call them second and third refs or whatever you want to call them, but they need to be allowed make calls if they're in the area of the incident.

[sligoman2]

You will have inconsistencies regardless of whether it's one or 2 refs.  Does anyone know exactly what you can and can't do while tackling apart from dragging a man down or pulling the Shirt?  I think 2 refs would get on the same page quickly, it works in other sports...

[Throw ball]

I think much of the problem is the how the rules are too open to interpretation. As an example you see the player with the ball getting tackled and suddenly swarmed. One referee will give a free for overcarrying and another a free to the forward for a push or the like. Both fouls may have occurred but what is the correct decision. My favourite bug bear is that if a defender tackles one on one a foul and booking is more easily seen. The swarm defending often results in 'incidental ' physical contact which is seldom penalised. In many cases the 'incidental contact is deliberate and used to 'soften' the forward. Where did the rule go that you were only allowed to tackle the ball and shoulder charge? If you are making physical contact with an opponent and not making an attempt for the ball surely that is a foul. Or is it?

I suppose what I am trying to say is how do we improve the standard of refereeing when so many rules can be interpreted differently? It is also no coincidence that the standard of refereeing has apparently fallen at the same time as the game has morphed into an at many times unwatchable mix of rugby league and basketball.

[DuffleKing]

Barry Cassidy and Anthony Nolan are the All Ireland football semi final referees this year. That summarises where we are at.

[tippabu]

I don't think we need two refs. We need to use the other 7 officials that are supposed to be helping to run the game. They are all mic'ed up, so let the umpires, linesmen and fourth official advise the referee of off the ball frees etc.

this, the two sideline officials aswell as the 4th official are all intercounty refs and should have more use than they are currently used

[magpie seanie]

I think much of the problem is the how the rules are too open to interpretation. As an example you see the player with the ball getting tackled and suddenly swarmed. One referee will give a free for overcarrying and another a free to the forward for a push or the like. Both fouls may have occurred but what is the correct decision. My favourite bug bear is that if a defender tackles one on one a foul and booking is more easily seen. The swarm defending often results in 'incidental ' physical contact which is seldom penalised. In many cases the 'incidental contact is deliberate and used to 'soften' the forward. Where did the rule go that you were only allowed to tackle the ball and shoulder charge? If you are making physical contact with an opponent and not making an attempt for the ball surely that is a foul. Or is it?

I suppose what I am trying to say is how do we improve the standard of refereeing when so many rules can be interpreted differently? It is also no coincidence that the standard of refereeing has apparently fallen at the same time as the game has morphed into an at many times unwatchable mix of rugby league and basketball.

No - and this is what the problem is. The tackle is open to interpretation. Very little else is but it has become that way.

4 steps is not open to interpretation and is continuosly and consistently abused. Proper application of this rule alone would change the face of the game. That and many of the excuses for hand passes that are allowed. "Clear striking action" is what the rule says. A huge % of handpasses are throws with the token waving of a pretend "striking hand" at the ball.

With tackling you can usually see a pull or a hold or contact that is in no way attempting to play the ball. It is less clear granted but when you see guys who are good tacklers like Tyrone at times yesterday it's a tremendous skill. Everything is weighted in the ball carriers favour the way the game is nowaday. He can take 10 steps. He can throw the ball away to a teammate. He can dive and can even still get away with the old hook the arm trick. That's why defences are now crowd scenes....it's so hard for defenders one on one with the way the game is refereed. I played all over the field so this isn't a "backs union" post - I wish when I played as a forward the rules were implemented as they are now.

With the greatest respect to my fellow county man I don't think two refs would improve matters. As AZ says, there are already 7 officials there. I can just imagine the hoots of derision when both refs blow for a free and point in opposite directions....don't tell me it wouldn't happen!!!

I thought Nolan was really, really bad on Sunday. I've Tyrone blood so a bit biased and thought he was killing Tyrone especially in the second half. Most Monaghan folk think the opposite from what I hear.

[Never beat the deeler]

It's damn near impossible to ref gaelic football as there is no clear consensus on what the 'correct' interpretation of a tackle is.

In the AFL, there is a committee that periodically give public feedback on topical rules. E.g. recent ones have been head high contact or off the ball bumps. They show a few examples to say: this has been reffed this way until now, but we will be communicating to umpires to take this view of it.
That way players see what the agreed consensus is at the same time the refs do (obv the refs may get further in depth pointers from such a committee).

The problem with this approach is I doubt you could get consensus even within a committee as to what is the correct way to officiate a tackle, especially where there are multiple defenders around a forward in possession.

[Dinny Breen]

I think much of the problem is the how the rules are too open to interpretation. As an example you see the player with the ball getting tackled and suddenly swarmed. One referee will give a free for overcarrying and another a free to the forward for a push or the like. Both fouls may have occurred but what is the correct decision. My favourite bug bear is that if a defender tackles one on one a foul and booking is more easily seen. The swarm defending often results in 'incidental ' physical contact which is seldom penalised. In many cases the 'incidental contact is deliberate and used to 'soften' the forward. Where did the rule go that you were only allowed to tackle the ball and shoulder charge? If you are making physical contact with an opponent and not making an attempt for the ball surely that is a foul. Or is it?

I suppose what I am trying to say is how do we improve the standard of refereeing when so many rules can be interpreted differently? It is also no coincidence that the standard of refereeing has apparently fallen at the same time as the game has morphed into an at many times unwatchable mix of rugby league and basketball.

No - and this is what the problem is. The tackle is open to interpretation. Very little else is but it has become that way.

4 steps is not open to interpretation and is continuosly and consistently abused. Proper application of this rule alone would change the face of the game. That and many of the excuses for hand passes that are allowed. "Clear striking action" is what the rule says. A huge % of handpasses are throws with the token waving of a pretend "striking hand" at the ball.

With tackling you can usually see a pull or a hold or contact that is in no way attempting to play the ball. It is less clear granted but when you see guys who are good tacklers like Tyrone at times yesterday it's a tremendous skill. Everything is weighted in the ball carriers favour the way the game is nowaday. He can take 10 steps. He can throw the ball away to a teammate. He can dive and can even still get away with the old hook the arm trick. That's why defences are now crowd scenes....it's so hard for defenders one on one with the way the game is refereed. I played all over the field so this isn't a "backs union" post - I wish when I played as a forward the rules were implemented as they are now.

With the greatest respect to my fellow county man I don't think two refs would improve matters. As AZ says, there are already 7 officials there. I can just imagine the hoots of derision when both refs blow for a free and point in opposite directions....don't tell me it wouldn't happen!!!

I thought Nolan was really, really bad on Sunday. I've Tyrone blood so a bit biased and thought he was killing Tyrone especially in the second half. Most Monaghan folk think the opposite from what I hear.

[Syferus]

That explains so much.

[Rossfan]

Agree with Seanie - the overcarrying and throwing and allowing the ball carrier to get away with all sorts of assaults and charging etc. needs clamping on.
As the game is all about possession maybe time to consider allowing tackling of the man?

[Milltown Row2]

How many club games have you been at at one set of supporters are calling for a free and the other ones are laughing it off? everyone sees it differently, different angle, view blocked partially, looking in the other direction for a split second.. the referee has one chance to see it and call it straight away, he doesnt have slow mo, or replays..

He does at championship level have the use of umpires and linesmen. the fourth official will only be concerned with time and subs if honest, he'll be watching the game and not the off the ball stuff, and fourth official would be mainly at intercounty level.. that would be 8 official sets of eyes, all mic'd up to the referee who give an opinion on incidents the referee doesnt see or may see from a different view.. The referee is under no obligation to do anything with the info given to him on the likes of live play, someone tugging a shirt, or a forward pulling an arm and making out he's being fouled, the little nudge in the back when going for the ball and so on, the ref makes those calls, rightly or wrongly, he calls them as he see's them, thats all he can do.

the linesmen/umpires will help with, off the ball stuff they see, scores that they are in a better position to see, square ball (though thats not official but most ref's give the umpires a call on that) and help maybe with a penalty decision, i.e in the box or not

Having two referees will only mean more inconsistency, ones view on a foul might be the same up in the other side of the pitch, as said before using the linesmen for live calls is probably the way forward at intercounty football, providing the linesman 100% sure and is definitely up to the standard of the ref on the pitch, they usually are though...

It wouldnt surprise me that at some level across the board that some referee's will engage with linesmen and use them for that purpose of a live call, but the problem is at club level, can you imagine the gurning if the crowd found out that you are using the linesmen and not your own calls to make a judgement, be another stick to beat you with ffs!

Ive overuled umpires on scores from my position on the line, the sideline was giving me loads the whole half!

[Throw ball]

I think much of the problem is the how the rules are too open to interpretation. As an example you see the player with the ball getting tackled and suddenly swarmed. One referee will give a free for overcarrying and another a free to the forward for a push or the like. Both fouls may have occurred but what is the correct decision. My favourite bug bear is that if a defender tackles one on one a foul and booking is more easily seen. The swarm defending often results in 'incidental ' physical contact which is seldom penalised. In many cases the 'incidental contact is deliberate and used to 'soften' the forward. Where did the rule go that you were only allowed to tackle the ball and shoulder charge? If you are making physical contact with an opponent and not making an attempt for the ball surely that is a foul. Or is it?

I suppose what I am trying to say is how do we improve the standard of refereeing when so many rules can be interpreted differently? It is also no coincidence that the standard of refereeing has apparently fallen at the same time as the game has morphed into an at many times unwatchable mix of rugby league and basketball.

No - and this is what the problem is. The tackle is open to interpretation. Very little else is but it has become that way.

4 steps is not open to interpretation and is continuosly and consistently abused. Proper application of this rule alone would change the face of the game. That and many of the excuses for hand passes that are allowed. "Clear striking action" is what the rule says. A huge % of handpasses are throws with the token waving of a pretend "striking hand" at the ball.

With tackling you can usually see a pull or a hold or contact that is in no way attempting to play the ball. It is less clear granted but when you see guys who are good tacklers like Tyrone at times yesterday it's a tremendous skill. Everything is weighted in the ball carriers favour the way the game is nowaday. He can take 10 steps. He can throw the ball away to a teammate. He can dive and can even still get away with the old hook the arm trick. That's why defences are now crowd scenes....it's so hard for defenders one on one with the way the game is refereed. I played all over the field so this isn't a "backs union" post - I wish when I played as a forward the rules were implemented as they are now.

With the greatest respect to my fellow county man I don't think two refs would improve matters. As AZ says, there are already 7 officials there. I can just imagine the hoots of derision when both refs blow for a free and point in opposite directions....don't tell me it wouldn't happen!!!

I thought Nolan was really, really bad on Sunday. I've Tyrone blood so a bit biased and thought he was killing Tyrone especially in the second half. Most Monaghan folk think the opposite from what I hear.

A player takes 4 steps and is fouled and then takes a further 4 steps and is fouled again. He then takes 2 further steps and scores. If the referee plays advantage on both fouls is he correct? It is easy to complain about steps but while the crap of swarm defence continues to destroy games that is the least of the games problems.

[Hound]

No, steps don't reset on advantage. Once the player breaks the steps rule, it is a free the other way.
The advantage rule needs looked at anyway. If a player shoots and misses during the advantage the free shouldn't be given. The advantage was that he was allowed to go on and have a shot. One or the other, not both ffs.

The advantage rule is excellent when implemented correctly. Especially where the fouled player is able to get his shot away, but can still come back for the free if it misses. If the defender doesn't want the opposition to have two shots at it, then don't foul the forward.

[Tyrdub]

Barry Cassidy and Anthony Nolan are the All Ireland football semi final referees this year. That summarises where we are at.

As an ex-Ref, and someone who has feet in both camp on AIF day, i thought Barry was outstanding on Saturday, Anthony less so