of course refs make mistakes in every game and its as tough a job to get right as i can think of. But at the same time the ref and his team should only be making decisions that he and his officials are convinced are the right ones. This wont always be mean they make the right call of course. But if they where to come out post match and say this was the angle i saw it from and this is why i made the decision and now i realise it may have been the wrong decision. There would be greater respect and empathy for refs. At present, if a ref makes a string of bad calls he gains a bad reputation that doesn't leave him partly because nobody gets to hear his point of view on the incidents.
SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts:1110 - 07/01/2017 10:55:08Right then with your logic post match conferences should involve every single player who takes the field and every member of a teams management/coaching team and every single one of the decisions they make in a game should be dissected and discussed.
There wouldn't at all be more respect for referees if this was the case. There would be less. You would just undermine referees and the institution of refereeing

That's just it though, they make mistakes in every game.If they have to come out and explain themselves continuously then they will only be completely undermined and have to second guess every decision as this will only lead to further mistakes which will make them completely ineffective. That just isn't realistic and is plain daft.
Dubh_linn (Dublin) - Posts:1125 - 07/01/2017 12:38:33spot on

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 07/01/2017 15:12:56    1943738

Dubh_linn (Dublin) - Posts: 2312 - 07/01/2017 15:13:06    1943739

yea because opinions of GAA refs at present are just fantastic aren't they! if refs in rugby can give a reason for a decision during a match then giving a reason after the heat of the contest wouldn't be asking much. I think the level of respect rises when a decision is explained and in GAA and soccer this doesnt happen and thats why players and managers are banging their heads of the wall and this increases hostility from supporters also. That is far more pressure than a simple air clearing interview.
SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts:1110 - 07/01/2017 13:37:43But an interview after games particularly if there was a majorly contentious decision made would just lead to more questions than answers and if an illjudged comment was made then the referee would be under even more pressure in their next game. The decisions should be explained during the match. Mic up a referee and have them explain their decisions during game time like in rugby but no explanation after the final whistle has gone

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 07/01/2017 15:16:00    1943740

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 07/01/2017 15:51:33    1943754

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 07/01/2017 16:03:43    1943760

Dubh_linn (Dublin) - Posts: 2312 - 07/01/2017 16:29:27    1943765

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 07/01/2017 16:35:05    1943767

AHP (Dublin) - Posts: 323 - 07/01/2017 16:52:38    1943772

A good ref will explain his call, a bad one won't. I got booked in games because I asked the ref what was that free for, his reply 'I'm the ref not you and you do what I say' lets just say he didn't make that statement again. The smartest way of asking a question without the threat of booking is when a ref gives a dodgy free let the opposition take the free and then when you get the chance ask the ref what was the free for, he can hardly book you or move the free forward when the free has already been taken

riverboys (Mayo) - Posts: 1389 - 07/01/2017 17:13:40    1943779

I cannot for the life of me see referees or any GAA officials agreeing to or asking a referee to come in and explain why he made this decision and why he made that decision.My original point though was that it's the spectators insulting referees and indeed the victors by suggesting it was the referees fault they lost the match.That's a poor reflection on themselves I think.

catch22 (USA) - Posts: 2148 - 07/01/2017 17:29:03    1943784

KingdomBoy1 (Kerry) - Posts: 14092 - 07/01/2017 18:02:23    1943794

he could explain not just that he saw it differently, but WHY he saw it differently. there has to be an applied logic for a decision to be made. Also, I don't for one second believe that a referee who takes abuse from thousands of people every game will become unnerved about his job because of a one to one post match interview. Some refs explain to players, others dismiss them which winds a llayer up even further, which tells you all you need to know about the current communication process i think.
SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts:1115 - 07/01/2017 15:51:33Having referees explain their decisions like you propose undermines the legitimacy of referees. Do referees get abuse from thousands of people every game?
I don't think having to be interviewed helps referees or helps the game improve. Some referees do explain things to players while others don't but that is basic coaching that the referee development officers should be helping those who don't communicate to do so better,
Having an interview after the game doesn't add to the process.

the point of the interview should be to help understand how the ref arrived at his decision which should be straighforward question and answer with little risk of ill judged comments.
I wouldn't disagree with the in game explanation apart from the fact that GAA is played a lot quicker than rugby and a referee has to cover a lot more ground which is pressure enough there and then, which is why a past match interview might be a better fit. But i do agree with the idea of explaining decisions one way or another it provides clarity decreases speculation.
SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts:1115 - 07/01/2017 16:03:43 But why does a referee have to explain all of this to the media after the game when nothing can be changed, This would be just throwing the referee under the bus. What would be better for referees would be better training from ref development officers, for players/coaches and supporters to give more respect to officials.

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 07/01/2017 19:06:39    1943812

cavanman47 (Cavan) - Posts: 5017 - 07/01/2017 19:12:14    1943814

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 07/01/2017 19:19:51    1943817

cavanman47 (Cavan) - Posts: 5017 - 07/01/2017 19:20:35    1943818

A good ref will explain his call, a bad one won't. I got booked in games because I asked the ref what was that free for, his reply 'I'm the ref not you and you do what I say' lets just say he didn't make that statement again. The smartest way of asking a question without the threat of booking is when a ref gives a dodgy free let the opposition take the free and then when you get the chance ask the ref what was the free for, he can hardly book you or move the free forward when the free has already been taken
riverboys (Mayo) - Posts:812 - 07/01/2017 17:13:40Your first sentence isn't true at all.

So players that train 8/9 months of the year breaking up their bodies for no monitory gain should just accept a refs bad decisions and shut their gobs coz they'll be branded bad losers? No that don't cut it for me, refs should be made accountable for their bad decisions and "mistakes" end of story.
And punished accordingly.
KingdomBoy1 (Kerry) - Posts:4552 - 07/01/2017 18:02:23So referees who train 8/9 months of the year for no monetary gain and do so with all manners of abuse thrown at them should have to face the hounds and explain every decision they make?
Referees are already made accountable for bad decisions. They are "punished". They get dropped from level they are reffing if mistake is bad enough. They have to do lower level games or are stood down on a weekend or for 2 weekends.

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 07/01/2017 19:31:50    1943821

Yes, but the logic has to be to leave the ref make the call without having to explain any decision that is questioned. You could have a dozen questionable instances in any match. He sees it differently because he is seeing it in real time at pitch level and doesn't have the advantage of a spectators viewpoint or a studio pundit. You are only going to provide an even more pointless scenario by showing a ref something which he couldn't possibly have seen from a different perspective.He can't make that call because it's not his vantage point. No amount of explaining is going to change what is seen in two different sets of circumstance.
Dubh_linn (Dublin) - Posts:1128 - 07/01/2017 16:29:27Exactly. Ref see's incidents from one angle at pitch level with no option of a replay. Having ref answer questions after games when media will have had multiple replays of incidents and multiple angles to see incidents from adds nothing to the game and doesn't aid the referee in the slightest

where did i say that every player etc should go through post match conferences? your making things up now. no player is entrusted with the authority to make game changing calls so you can't compare like for like in this.
SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts:1115 - 07/01/2017 16:35:05I never said you did i said it as its the same thing. Should every player have to attend an interview after the game and be taken to task for all decisions they make. No. Hauling referees over the coals makes the refereeing of future games more difficult and undermines refereeing as an institution

In fairness the vast majority of referees seem to explain their decisions to players 'in game' as could be seen on the rte programme last year about the final, I think it might have been David Coldrick, and also in the Setanta sports programme about referees a few years ago when the refs were mic'ed up. Asking a ref to explain his decision to all the spectators after a game however is an absolute non runner. For a start one of the biggest reasons for the so called confusion about decisions made by refs during games is the huge lack of knowledge of the rules that seems to exist among spectators. Even now after a couple of years in existence the amount of spectators that spend the game baying for black cards for every contact, slip or fall that occurs on the pitch is ridiculous.
As has already been stated the performance of referees in inter county games is assessed and reviewed by the referees board after every round of games, this should be sufficient to keep standards improving instead of expecting refs to be grilled after games. It doesn't happen in other games, why should it happen in the GAA.
AHP (Dublin) - Posts:170 - 07/01/2017 16:52:38 Yeah explaining in game is needed and has to happen but after game in front of press no way as that benefits nobody.

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 07/01/2017 19:32:19    1943823

catch22 (USA) - Posts: 2148 - 07/01/2017 19:37:35    1943825

catch22 (USA) - Posts: 2148 - 07/01/2017 19:48:33    1943828

and what great authority do players have over game changing decisions ormo? how does telling the truth somehow undermine a refereeing institution?

SaffronDon (Antrim) - Posts: 2386 - 07/01/2017 19:51:19    1943829