I have always watched referees as much as the game in question and in my opinion this year has seen a dramatic deterioration in refereeing standards.
Childs has got progressively worse seemingly unable to make good decisions without listening to his earpiece.
Hicks seems disinterested
Bentham looks to struggle to keep up
And the newcomers have not really impressed

I am a great believer in the view that as you simply cannot have a game without a referee it us disappointing that we have not not seen progress in this critical part of the game.

The reason why I think this has happened is that you need to look at who is in charge of referees.....

Steve Ganson who had a similar competence level to what child's has and never quite understood that the game was not all about him and that the fans paid to watch the 2 teams and not to listen to his whistle tooting for 80 minutes.

RFL need to look at this area of the game very closely

Reason behind the poor quality of refereeing this year?

Too much criticism and abuse, week in week out from various stakeholders.

They are no better, but certainly no worse, than before.

Would anyone like to link to a post on this forum where they celebrated some "golden age" of refereeing?

ganson

Completely disagree a blatant lack of Quality Coaching & the over protection from RFL when major errors & blatant inconsistencies occur by that i mean make them culpable explain why & thenbCoach them to be better.
I'll also add this i've got a try/no try has to go too many guesses then you ger scenarios where the VR doesn't want to show his mate up just make it a straight ? Try yes or No then let the VR review that passage of play.
Finally instruct them to show some nadgers when serious foul play occurs too many are bottling red cards imo.

I don't know if they have actually deteriorated at all. I've watched the game for 60 years and never has there been such close scrutiny from multiple cameras, constant public criticism from all and sundry, and neither set of fans happy. They make mistakes, but they always did. Why would anyone want to be a ref in such circumstances?
I think RU has the right idea, get the video ref more involved in live play, but could that happen only in televised games?

Can't say I've noticed big differences in the standards of refereeing in over 25 years of watching the game.

Obviously, it frustrates fans when certain referees are perceived to interrupt the flow of the game by giving a string of penalties in a short period of time, especially if it is against the home team. But referees have to be able to call it as they see it. They are not robots, and are going to make mistakes from time to time, no matter how much technology and support is brought in. Referees are under-valued in most sports, and fans directing ire and abuse at them is not going to encourage people to join the profession or increase standards.

The referee is an easy person to blame for the failings of a team. In the majority of cases, fans who like to do this are simply blind to the deficiencies of the club they support. Sometimes refereeing decisions seem harsh, but that is part and parcel of the game, along with freak injuries, the bounce of the ball, and variable weather conditions. 19 times out of 20 the better team on the day will win in spite of these variables. Better to fixate on improving playing standards IMO.

VR at every game like in the NRL. Simple.

This would not solve the problem. At absolute best, it would mean that try/no try decisions might improve.

There is a bigger problem with the standard of officiating on both sides of the world that technology cannot fix.

Referees are nowadays too focussed on 'managing the game' and 'coaching' players to keep penalities to a minimum. Bill Harrigan was the first to do it (and easily the best), but he only started managing the game towards the latter end of his career, once he had the respect of the players. In his early career he was a stickler for the rules - he'd ping a hundred penalties if need be. Now all referees want to be like Bill Harrigan, but they've not built up the respect of the players, and more importantly, they've not got the bottle to start showing cards regularly for dissent, multiple infringements - how long does it take for a team to get put on a team warning, and then how often once a team is on a warning do they get away with more penalties?

One of the problems is the coaches know that the referees don't want to blow 50 penalties in a game, so the players are coached to push the limits of holding down, wrestling, offsides etc at all times.

The whole game could be fixed really easily if we just decided to apply the rules. Stop allowing creeping offside from kick offs, stop allowing drop outs to be taken in front of the try line, stop allowing sloppy play the balls, make defenders clear the ruck or release the player as soon as held is called, stop allowing the blindside defence to be offside just because the ball didn't go that way - this is now a tactic used by the coaches - if you're short on the blind side in defence, be well offside - the attacking team will look up and see there is no space and go to the open side, and the ref won't ping you, because the ball didn't go that way, so play was unaffected (even though it was, because the option to go blind was taken away by the defenders being offside)

Simply put the players, coaches and fans on notice that from a certain date, the rules will be applied black and white - we'll have a few rounds where the spectacle is ruined because the refs will have to blow the pea out of the whistle and start binning people for repeated infringments, but it will soon calm down as the players will know they can't get away with bending any of the rules.

I should add - this would also then get rid of the lottery at the PTB when a player loses the ball - is it a dropped ball, is it milking for a penalty or is it interference - if the defenders cleared the ruck immediately as the rules state, there'd be much less requirement for interpretation.

Also - I'm sick of hearing the refs call 'milking' when an attacker is holding the defender in, or thrashing around so that the defender can't clear the ruck... If as a ref you're calling 'milking', then just penalise the bloody bloke for unsportsman-like conduct, and if he does it again, bin him....

Rant over....

Its been very noticeable this year and when he's blowing hard he does things to slow the game down.

Thought I had stumbled on the Rovers/FC board by mistake.
In years past I seem to remember a referee controller telling refs to penalise 25% of Scrums!
I think the fitness overall has improved, but there are refs who blow up when the pace increases, I think that has gone on since the year dot,nothing new here. As already stated the problem is that the refs decisions are under a lot more scrutiny,and the tweaking/chopping and changing of the rule book(done for the best intentions) ain't helpful to them. I also think the sky clowns do not help by constantly looking for controversy where there is none, just because they have nothing positive to add to the commentary. Every teams supporters can pin point decisions that have gone against their teams,but unfortunately poo happens.

Until we get robots as referees (which will mean stop start matches), we will have to put up with what we have.

football has spent millions on refereeing. yes they still make errors but they are miles better than they were 10 years ago. RL is a pub sport in comparison. they have one man who wasn't that great himself.
I will say that the last 3 games I've seen child do he's been very good. he's let the game flow. really managed it well. I hope he keeps improving.
it's a difficult job and there aren't a lot coming through.
also a referee shouldn't be dropped after making a fu*k up. players aren't.
if they make lots of bad errors or have 3 bad games in a row then yes. I moan too but fans expect refs to be perfect but if a player messes up he's only human. standards need to improve yes, we need more refs too so encourage kids to do it.
I was a decent semi pro footballer but I got into reffing by accident and it took me far higher, and to a lot of iconic grounds I was never good enough to play at

I wonder how many of the people that criticise and verbally abuse referees, have ever refereed a game themselves, or hold referring or coaching qualifications.

Bloody hell, you think this lot are $hite? Back in the day there were the likes of Mick Naughton, Stan Wall, Fred Lindop...

Truly a "good old days" scenario - except in reverse

Hate this argument.....

Wonder how many people criticising players have played pro
Wonder how many people criticising politicians have ever been a politician
Wonder how many people who criticise food in a restaurant have been a chef
Wonder how many people who complain about NHS have been a doctor
Wonder how many people who criticse s for leaving a mess have been a
Etc etc etc

People can have an a perfectly valid opinion based on what they've seen and experienced without having done the job themselves.

Exactly agree 100% i'll also add nobody in their right mind expects perfection but lets be straight far too many blatantly wrong calls are getting made week after week & i dont mean fwd passes or knock ons game changing incidents like Westwood on Sutty Obstruction trys given one week yet not the next etc etc.

Thaler has gone backwards since 2015 however him and Bentham are the only ones who have any decent rapport with players. The others almost determined not to have any and don't work to work with the players to make a match as good as it can be. Think this has played s part in more ref/player dissent incidents.

Child to be fair to him has actually been a little better just lately because he finally seems to have realised not every game needs dozens of penalties.

Doesn't seem to be good enough communication between the Match Officals Department and coaches/clubs judging by some interviews by coaches who seem to be at a lost with them.

Whilst I understand concerns about criticisms of referees, it shouldn't go the other way of "don't say nothing" because we don't have a game without then, or setting an example. Because nothing will change if you take the latter approach and sweep it all under the carpet,

^ Excellent post.

I dont think the standard of referees has dropped really but some fans seem more obsessed in watching the ref than the players.

Guy behind me in Carnegie spends 80 mins just constantly moaning at ref. If a Leeds player gives an obvious and clear penalty away that's not the players fault it's cos the ref is biased. Leeds haven't conceded a try all year that wasn't caused by a referee's mistake.

A few weeks ago we outplayed Salford on the day and won comfortably yet some moron threw his beer at the ref who had no bearing on the result. At Wigan last week a guy near me who I've sat near before just constantly begging for a penalty at every play the ball and was adamant we was been cheated in a game where the opponents were simply too good for our young team.

It's a tough job and if you accept they will make mistakes from time to time and accept that players decide the outcome of games not the refs then things will seem better.

We have a group of inexperienced refs at the moment learning their trade but jeez the days of Whitfield, Lindop and Kershaw was no better than now.

I think what fans moan about the most is when they perceive that the ref is being inconsistent.
This seems to me to be especially the case at the PTB - not surprising I suppose when they are the most frequent events in any game.
Your side seems to be penalised for flops or hands on the ball whilst the opponents don't.
Being biased I think that Ablett & JJB get penalised for such offences far more than Roby or O'Loughlin for example who to my mind are equally culpable.
I actually agree with the poster who said that Child has improved this year but I'd always rather watch a game reffed by Thaler who apperas to let the game flow more & has a better rapport with the players.

Interesting thread. My take on it is that all the teams try to bend the rules and each ref has his own Interpretation of keeping the 10 and just how long he will allow the defenders to hold down without calling a penalty.The team who does these things right to the limit generally win the game I'd say?Hull/Radford have Bentham on a string this year and seem to play him spot on,added in the Fonua hip hop routine every time he's tackled milking penalties generally simulating football style. Enjoy the semi final and good luck

The reason for poor quality is because they are not accountable. They can put in what ever performance and they continue the week after. There isn't enough of them. The move to full time doesn't work, they haven't improved any since that move. Have more available, and make them accountable, and an improvement would be quick.

For over 60 years I have never felt the standard of RL referees has been good enough or they are as good as RU referees.

I would call for the refs to apply the rules sympathetically which means not blowing up for first offences that are not affecting play but warn the player concerned that he will penalise next time he sees it. Above all they should be consistent and maintain fairness. I favour having second referees and having help from the VR. If there is doubt in a try being scored the question posed of the VR is simply 'is there any reason for not awarding the try'? and this should include forward passes.

I agree with a few different people on this thread. Personally I don't think there's been a decline in the quality of refereeing, I just think it could be better. However there are, I think, some unreasonable expectations put on to referees. They are expected to get every single decision right in every game because every decision is scrutinised minutely and, due to the way the game has evolved, every decision is important due to the impact it has on possession and field position. I think this is unreasonable for 2 reasons. 1 - the speed of the game and 2 - the referee has literally thousands of decisions to make in every game.

When you start looking at how many decisions a referee has to make it's no wonder they get sone wrong and miss some. A ref has to decide if all 13 defenders were onside, if all attackers who touch the ball are onside, if every pass is forward or not, if every tackle is below the head/neck, if there was interference or holding down, if the ball was played correctly and if every contact from both defender and attacker is legal. On every single tackle/play-the-ball which there must be what? 350+ per game.

I think there are obviously issues with recruitment and retention of referees, we've heard on here previously stories about how little support refs are given lower down the system and of course it's well known how much unnecessary abuse they receive in the amateur leagues.
However I think Gotcha has a point on the full time nature of the officials. Either we need a lot more of them full time and need to pay them significantly more so that we don't lose them to other professions, or go back to part time.

Personally I also think the game is too fast for 1 man to adequately referee. I think we need some kind of "2nd ref" system to help the referee out.

We could also do with Sky not focussing so much on every single decision. It's frankly laughable that they have Stuart Cummings as part of the commentary team and shows what their aim is for their production.

Unfortunately RL is pretty unique, in my opinion, in sport. It has far, far more decisions for a referee to make than say football but unlike Union where many "wrong" reffing decisions are hidden from view in the rucks and mauls, RL is open for everyone to see when the ref gets something wrong.