Owen Doyle's Take: Referees Must Remember They Aren't Coaches

Pau’s Stade du Hameau last Friday evening. The home team scored 24 points, but the touring Bulls managed to win, by getting just a couple more, with 26. At first glance, why on earth should that match have any interest for us? Here’s why. The visitors’ total included a seven-point try which came following an attacking maul late in the first half. Referee Karl Dickson told the ball carrier, Akker van der Merwe, to “use it” – so far so good. Next, an instruction came from the referee, as he shouted “break away” to the hooker while tapping the player twice before pulling on the player’s jersey, as a further “reminder” to get out of there. You might need to read that again – it was quite incredible and completely unacceptable. If Van der Merwe does not exit the maul or pass the ball back, it is of course a scrum to Pau. In the final analysis it was a critical score. If that’s not a case of a referee moving into player-coaching mode, I don’t know what is. I do know that it is not refereeing. The Pau defence was badly organised, and allowed Van der Merwe an easy enough passage to touch down after he had eventually taken the heaviest of hints and left the maul. Handré Pollard, of course, didn’t miss the conversion. The final try for the visitors came in the 73rd minute when Nizaam Carr crashed over. It was much to the chagrin of Pau’s Aaron Grandidier-Nkanang, whose defensive effort was obstructed by Dickson, positioned far too close to the action. Again, Pollard was on target, and the Bulls took the victory by those two points. Add this performance to Dickson’s mysterious final penalty against Munster in Toulon last week – he will need to be a heck of a lot better when he handles our match against France. We discussed Matt Carley’s coaching of players last week and it continued in Munster’s defeat to Castres. “No, no, no,” did indeed persuade Gauthier Maravat to halt his advance at the breakdown. But the player had already delayed the ball by causing Munster to hesitate in taking possession; prevention in tandem with an offence is not a runner. The reason why these events must be of great interest is that the referees involved are English, and three of Ireland’s five Six Nations matches will be refereed by English officials, two by Dickson (France and Wales) and one by Luke Pearce (Scotland). Carley is not involved as a referee, which is probably a blessing for him and also for Ireland. Pearce had quite a good game in Leinster’s win over Bayonne, but he took a soft approach on players questioning his calls. [ Conor Murray: ‘Taking the space’ is the latest rugby jargon I do not understandOpens in new window ] Andy Farrell needs to know exactly what is coming down the line. Joël Jutge, World Rugby’s first-class elite referee manager, will listen to concerns and explain how things will be refereed in the Six Nations when he meets the coaches before the tournament. Another key aspect for Ireland, indeed the whole Six Nations, is communication and how this key verbal interaction will take place. Shouting at referees, and aggressively appealing or disagreeing with decisions, has reached near-pandemic proportions. The answer is in the hands of the match officials, who need to adopt a zero tolerance approach by sanctioning it immediately with a penalty, accompanied if necessary by an appropriately coloured card. If the coaches knew that to be the policy, then surely they’d prepare their players accordingly. But the current referees’ hands-off acceptance has allowed it to spread. In Leinster’s game against La Rochelle, Carley warned that players who shouted at him would be sanctioned without actually ever getting around to penalising anybody. However, on Saturday, we saw the same referee taking Tadhg Beirne aside and pointedly advise him that four Munster players had just screamed at him. This time he did follow through with a penalty. It was a change in direction by Carley, but also a welcome one. It’s unfathomable as to why referees have let this slip so badly. No one will get any mileage from criticising officials who sanction verbal abuse, so it’s not a difficult thing to do. Maybe some referees think it shows a sign of weakness on their part, whereas the reality is that it actually displays strength. English referees have always prided themselves in their communication skills and must believe that their use of first names demonstrates a relaxed and friendly approach. While they should do so, there’s probably no chance at all that they’ll alter their modus operandi. Perhaps “chummy-chummy” works in the English premiership, but Europe and the Six Nations are very different kettles of fish. Communication is, of course, a two-way street. Ireland will need to prepare their approach, particularly as to who may, and who may not, speak to the referee – the captain only strikes me as a good option. How they do it is extremely important, ‘respectful, firm, polite’ would be good starting points. Referees must also operate in the same manner, and not be condescending or dismissive. So, there are serious issues to discuss – before even mentioning the breakdown, the scrum and lineout – in advance of Farrell taking his men to Paris. It’s scheduled to be a most fan-unfriendly Thursday night kick-off time, apparently designed to avoid a TV clash with the opening ceremony of the Winter Olympics in Milan. Nevertheless, it’s Ireland’s opening match, and could not be of more importance. Clarifying all these issues is vital.