Two refs ... a South African invention

The Australians are making a big fuss about the possible introduction of a two-referee system in Super Rugby, but it is a systems that has long been in use in South Africa.

Andrew Cole, the former Test referee who is now the national referees’ coach in Australia, has been quoted on RugbyHeaven as saying that it could be introduced “as soon as next year”.

However, it has been used, trialled and refined in certain domestic league in South Africa – with mixed reaction to the ‘experiment’.

Australian Super 14 teams, facing falling spectator numbers, have pledged themselves to brighter rugby and using two referees may be used to facilitate this, according to Cole.

Cole is quoted as saying: ”[Introducing two referees] depends how the game goes this year with those new interpretations [of the tackle law], I guess. At this stage we’re sticking with the breakdown adjustment but it [two referees] is definitely an option.

”I know it was trialled in Durban, but those things tend to need development. I think they found issues in that the game is complicated at the breakdown and therefore because there are so many offences that can occur that it could have refs on either side of the breakdown with different interpretations.

”Again, it’s got some merit but at this stage it hasn’t pushed forward beyond that.”

The two referee system was developed and used in the strong koshuis (residence) competition at Stellenbosch University and refined considerably at the suggestion of Dr Craven and under the watchful eye of Professor Justus Potgieter of the faculty of Human Movement Science.

Potgieter, himself a provincial referee, involved several top referees in the project. Wynand Mans, the former Springbok player and at the time one of South Africa’s top referees, became a great proponent of using two referees.

The International Rugby Board gave permission for the experiment to go ahead. It was used in the club competitions in Western Province and is still used in the intense koshuis rugby at Stellenbosch. According to Potgieter the players are annoyed if only one referee arrives for their matches.

At an invitation from Northern Transvaal (now Blue Bulls) Mans went to Loftus Versfeld where he and Albert Adams, a Test referee, refereed an Under-20 provincial match. Mans says that the experiment was a huge success.

Positives

The system was refined at Stellenbosch and Potgieter and Mans drew up methodology for the use of two referees. Potgieter and Dr Bokkie Blaauw of Stellenbosch University monitored the use of two referees at Stellenbosch and found that there were fewer penalties, more playing time and fewer injuries.

Potgieter says: “I’d rather referee on my own; it’s more of a challenge and you move around more, but using two referees is better for the game. It may, of course, not be as appealing to a young, prospective referee.”

In 1995 IRB officials watched a match at Stellenbosch refereed by two referees and were not impressed. Using two referees petered out for lack of interest overseas and limited support in South Africa’s. Those who tried it were enthusiastic; those who did not try it poohpoohed the idea.

The two referees would act in concertina up and down the field in such a way that the players were almost all between them. Where there was a concentration of players – scrums, line-outs, rucks, mauls tackles – the referee on whose side it was would go in close while his partner went wide. The referee in close was in a position to watch the concentrated phase of play with full intent while his partner went wide to monitor the offside lines. Picking up offside at kicks was also easier. When play went into in-goal, one would speed into the in-goal while the other kept an eye on what was happening in the field of play.

Mans believed that it was a simple workable system. It was easy to explain its practical implementation.

What happened if there was disagreement?

Mans said that that did not present a problem as the referees could swiftly consult and the principle of first infringement would apply.

One of the 1990s’ objections was the expense – two referees instead of one. Since then the referees’ squad has grown. In experiments Potgieter and Mans found that it was quite possible to do away with touch judges as it was easy for two referees to keep an eye on the touch-line.

One of the advantages of having two referees is that it reduces the pressure on one man and the tendency to blame him.

One of the arguments for the introduction was the number officials used in other, less complicated games.

We asked some leading referees and give their reactions.

For:

Jonathan Kaplan: “I am in favour. I was one of the first to try it ( in 1990 when I was with the Western Province Referees’ Society ) and I think it is a great initiative! I would happily take part in the experiment,  and ultimately I think this should be judged by our customers – the players, coaches and spectators – in conjunction with the referees.”

Against:

André Watson: “I am not in favour of two referees. The rumour is faint one and I would not pay too much attention at this time.”

Nigel Owens: “I am against two referees. I don’t think there is anything wrong with it as it is now.”

Mark Lawrence: “Willie Roos and I did the two-referee system on an annual basis for the Ermelo High School Alumni vs Impalas. Feelings were mixed. Some players felt it inhibiting and couldn’t give their all, and so they stuck to the law! While others felt it slowed the game down. The reason was that the penalty count was higher. Occasionally, Willie and I, simultaneously,  awarded penalties in opposite directions. We then awarded a scrum to the team going forward.

“I felt it gave us more control and we were intimidated less and that we almost out-numbered the players, if you know what I mean. Could take a lot of pressure off the referees.

“For me, refereeing is a skill, encompassing man management skills,  and an art to be able to judge materiality and advantage. These are lost with two referees. And you cannot teach an old dog new tricks!”

Marius Jonker: “The fact that SANZAR is considering two referees per game comes as a surprise.

“I am certainly not enthusiastic about the thought at all. Referees are individuals and have different refereeing styles and abilities that they bring to the game. Having two referees per game could create inconsistencies within games. I guess the reason this is being looked at is the fact that the modern game is played at a ferocious pace and many believe that having two referees will eliminate referee mistakes.

“I can think of other ways to assist referees in making lesser mistakes………like expanding TMO input.”

Craig Joubert: “Personally not a fan of two referees. My feeling is that rugby is such a dynamic game that it takes a tremendous amount of application to ensure consistency for 80 minutes from one guy in the middle. Trying to coordinate consistency from two guys with the whistle in such a dynamic environment is a challenge I’m not convinced can be easily met. Certainly the manner in which I’ve been involved in a dual referee experiment would need refining and the roles to be clearly defined.

“Having said that I’m open to having my mind changed….”

Undecided:

Stuart Dickinson: “I haven’t heard a thing about this and so can’t really help.”

Freek Burger: “I agree with the principle but am not convinced that it will work in practice.

“My proposal is still to give assistant referees the powers of a second referee. They are involved with pointing out foul play but waste their time on the sidelines with their primary functions. Get them involved on the other side of scrums, for example, and they can make a worthwhile contribution.”

By Paul Dobson