Hiya Everyone from west of the blue mountains!
This is my first post so we'll see how we go.
I was thinking about the interview sterlo did last week with Bill Harrigan I think it was about how referees study the games and have a prevconceived idea of certain players who lie on the ruck, have more tendency to strip etc. Im wondering whether the clubs have knowledge of which players do certain things more often than others, according to the refs. Thinking that if we knew that they thought a certain player NEVER raked the ball then would some teams tell them to rake in a certain situation as strategy? An example was when we played the bunnies and we got called on that strip on Burgess, if that would have been called if it was somone the refs knew never raked. Conversy coaches could encourage the player to milk the penalty if they are being tackled by a player who the refs have targeted as lying on the ruck. Would be interesting to see who the refs think do what.....
Replies
Some interesting thoughts, however the elephant in the room that should be addressed is that referees are marking certain players. Referees are supposed to be impartial judges of the game but if they have pre-conceived notions of players then would that not affect the way they adjudicate certain games? It's ok for referees to do their background work in terms of which players may be more aggressive in certain situations and teams that are constantly offside but to have pre-conceived notions of players is tantamount to not being impartial.
I totally agree, but if its going to happen, which is ridiculous, then shouldnt clubs know which players the refs are targeting, or maybe they do. Cos I can guarantee if there is a way to squeeze some strategy out if then clubs like the strom will do it!