The question should be asked how many mistakes are made by the officials in a match, including touch judges. The mistakes made by officials in matches is now the main talking point of both sets of supporters, win or lose, and is far worse than it has ever been. As a teacher who has refereed games, I know how thankless the job is, but that doesn't excuse the poor standard of referees and touch judges in our game. The other interesting point in the article was the fact that the referees, after watching the DVD of the game, then AGREES the report that is sent to clubs. Isn't that a bit like asking kids to write their own school reports! No wonder there is no improvement.
Cummings: You had a crap game!
Ref: Yes but you have to tell the clubs I was great or I'm not signing my report.

Any wonder the fans have had enough/
get rid of Cummings and replace him with an ex player who the fans and coaches have some respect for ( e.g.paul sculthorpe)

The only thing worse than an incompetent referee is an ex-referee sticking up for the incompetent ones. Most of them take arrogance to the [in[/ith degree and are compensating for an early life of being bullied and a failed RL career.

Hicks lost control of that very early on and only Karma saved the game from being abandoned for fighting.

You see I have a problem with this (and I did when I was refereeing), someone like Ganson who is very arrogant might frighten the life out of his TJ by telling them not to interfere. This is him assuming he knows better and will see everything. The odd time they do come on you can see he hates been undermined/overruled. Plus it means that TJ can have a greater role in some geames depending who the ref is which is simply unfair.

I never said it was right but that's the way it works. In the past I've received instructions what have swung between "anything you see, come on for it and I'll back you up" to "we're on telly today, so all I want you to do is mark touch and flag goals". It's wrong, of course it's wrong and little appears to have changed in 30 or so years.

That's why I would like to see referees partnered with the same two TJs. You get to know what's required and instinctively know who should go long or short etc. Weaknesses in any system or individual would also be easier to pinpoint and work to eliminate.

I have never been uncritical of referees, despite what some may believe but if a few more people tried to catch them doing something right, instead of doing something wrong, we might start to get a better appreciation of what's happening on the non-playing side.

I had similar sets of instructions when I reffed, I like the idea of partnering teams together, they do this in the PL and it works well as you build up an understanding and also trust in each other.

Most of the West Stand must have overheard Mr Silverwood tell a persistent TJ at a game last year (I can't recall the opposition)," you are making me look a !!!!!!! idiot, when he insisted Hull had the put in to a scrum that he had given to the other team.

Like many on here I am sure, I have to admit to the B&W glasses sometimes making me see things one way that when watching replays or highlights on Sky I Have to admit the officials got right but refereeing decisions should not be the major talking points after games that they currently are.

I often get home and watch the replay to find that every decision the ref made that I thought was wrong at the match was actually correct.

The problem is when they make a howler it adds credibility to our black and white view of all the other decisions.

Obviously I have some bias but I often find myself as the voice of reason, regarding decisions, with the fans around me. However, the area of the game that really annoys me, and we seem to always be on the wrong end of, is the interpretation of the referee with regards to a ball steal/knock on. An FC player can have the ball stripped and the decision is a knock on and then literally in the next set almost an identical incident will happen and we get penalised. This is the main area where referees are "influenced" IMO. We also seem to be on the wrong end of the decision when the referee hasnt seen how the ball came out and basically just guesses. I'm sure we must get some of these in our favour but I still get the feeling that more often then not the decision goes against us regardless of whether we were the ball carrier or the defender.

Hasn't that been tried?

Indeed it has. Greg McCallum took over from Fred Lindop and was eventually replaced by Stuart Cummings.

rlAn interview with McCallum from February 2000rl

Exactly what I was meaning. Along with the interference in the ruck, I think the 2 things are largely influenced by reputation. At times it almost seems like the ref just bases it on whether or not he thinks one team is too good to drop the ball so it must be a penalty or not good enough to hold onto it so it was bound to be a knock on. Warrington are a great example; no matter who they are playing they always seem to come out on top in this area with replays showing little difference between the incidents. It helps them get a roll on with the weight of possession.

Absolutely right and as I think we've both said before it's the decisions that aren't given that have more influence IMO than those that are maybe given wrongly. Following on from your theme things like not square at marker seem to be given far more often against the lower teams yet there are numerous times when the better teams are in exactly the same position but it's not given. It's a mindset for some refs IMO. Lower teams get pulled for offside yet better teams have a fast line speed is another one. Refs influence games by not giving decisions as much as they do by giving them.

For those thinking this is all a deliberate plot, you'd better head over to the 9/11 conspiracy theorists site, you'd be in good company

I have no doubt that the vast majority of decisions refs make are correct, however it's the inconsistent way the rules are applied that is frustrating. For instance, you will see a ref ignoring offside for play after play only to blow up when he feels like it. Too often, refs give multiple penalties to one side in succession, starving one team of the ball and influencing the flow of the game and potentially the outcome. Need a major rethink on referees IMO