ABUSE of referees has suddenly, following Wayne Barnes' retirement, become an issue in England. An RFU survey showed that 18% of the disciplinary cases they handled last year involved referee abuse, with 49% of the match officials they contacted complained of being the target of some sort of abuse.
How does Scotland compare – we wondered? Well, a trawl through the Disciplinary section of the SRU website produced the following information.
In the first half (August – December) of Season 2022-23, the SRU dealt with 92 disciplinary cases; of which 13 (14.1%) were described as “referee abuse”.
In the first half (again August- December) of Season 2023-24, the SRU has dealt with 143 disciplinary cases (a worrying rise of 55%); of which 16 ( 11.2%) were for referee abuse. So, more instances of this offence, but, in terms of the overall discipline structure, a percentage drop.
So, we can all pat ourselves on the back, we Scots appear to be becoming more-tolerant and more-respectful of our match officials. That said, the fact that the level of cases coming up before the SRU “beaks” has risen by 55% should perhaps be worrying us.
It is interesting to analyse which offences are most-frequent in our game over the past two seasons – the breakdown by offences, and percentages of the overall cases are:
2022-23 : punching/striking an opponent : 28 offences (30.4%)
2023-24 : punching/striking an opponent : 37 offences (25.9%)
2022-23 : two yellow cards : 15 offences (16.3%)
2023-24 : two yellow cards : 12 offences ( 8.4%)
2022-23 : referee abuse : 13 offences (14.1%)
2023-24 : referee abuse : 16 offences (11.2%)
2022-23 : high tackles : 13 offences (14.1%)
2023-24 : high tackles : 22 offences (15.4%)
2022-23 : drop tackles : 6 offences (6.5%)
2023.24 : drop tackles : 2 offences (2.2%)
2022-23 : kicking an opponent : 3 offences (3.3%)
2023-24 : kicking an opponent : 4 offences (2.8%)
2022-23 : dangerous charging : 3 offences (3.3%)
2023-24 : dangerous charging : 3 offences (2.1%)
2022-23 : dangerous play : 2 offences (2.2%)
2023-24 : dangerous play : 5 offences (3.5%)
2022-23 : unsportsmanlike behaviour : 1 offence (1.1%)
2023-24 : unsportsmanlike behaviour : 1 offence (0.7%)
2022-23 : leading with an elbow or forearm : 1 offence (1.1%)
2023-24 : leading with an elbow or forearm : 1 offence (0.7%)
2022-23 : biting : 1 offence (1.1%)
2023-24 : biting : 0 offences
2022-23 : stamping/trampling an opponent : 2 offences (2.2%)
2023-24 : stamping/trampling an opponent : 6 offences (4.2%)
2022-23 : head butting an opponent : 3 offences (3.3%)
2023-24 : head butting an opponent : 5 offences (3.5%)
2022-23 : dangerous play at a ruck or maul : 1 offence (1.1%)
2023-24 ; dangerous play at a ruck or maul : 4 offences (2.8%)
The above 14 offences are ones which we can compare over the last two seasons, however, in the first half of this current season, the disciplinary panel has had to deal with a further 12 offences, which didn't come up last season. These are, again with the percentages of the total crime count:
2023-24 : tip tackles : 9 offences (6.3%)
2023-24 : retaliation : 4 offences (2.8%)
2023-24 : kneeing an opponent : 2 offences (1.4%)
2023-24 : homophobic abuse : 2 offences (1.4%)
2023-24 : playing an opponent without the ball : 1 offence (0.7%)
2023-24 : random act of violence : 1 offence (0.7%)
2023-24 : racial abuse : 1 offence (0.7%)
2023-24 : tackle in the air : 1 offence (0.7%)
2023-24 : late tackle : 1 offence (0.7%)
2023-24 : making contact with an opponent's head : 1 offence (0.7%)
2023-24 : physical abuse by a player towards a touch judge, by throwing a ball at him : 1 offence (0.7%)
2023-24 : ongoing cases : 1 case (0.7%)
Of the offences in which a year-on-year comparison can be made, abuse of the referee, the one which sent me down this route has gone up, in the niumbers prosecuted by the Union, but, has actually decreased as a percentage of overall “prosecutions” - which is to be welcomed.
The percentage of high tackles which led to disciplinary action also rose; however, of the 22 cases this season, the vast majority (14) happened in the opening month of the season, the period during which the new tackle height was being introduced, and the message appears to have got across – 14 sanctioned high tackles in that first month, only 8 in the three months since.
It is good to see biting on the wane, but the instances of racial or homophobic abuse are not a good look for the game, let's hope these offences also wither and die.
In regard to referee abuse, the SRU is certainly hitting offenders hard. The player who threw a ball at a touch judge, received a 14 week ban; another player, who verbally abused a referee copped an 11 week ban, while a club coach who launched a tirade at another referee got a 10 week ban. Worse hit, however, was a spectator, whose “advice” to the match referee cost him a 28 week ban.
It's maybe worth going along to any disciplinary meeting and making your case for leniency, 10 of the 143 cases resulted in a decision that the sending-off had been sufficient punishment, while a further 14 players saw their red card rescinded.
With some experience of the discipline process not sure that’s the best advice AA. You have three options when facing a disciplinary case. Accept the report and label disposes. Put in mitigation but don’t appear. Again panel disposes.
ReplyDeleteFinally, you want to appear - therefore you disagree with the report and have evidence or examples of why you should be reprieved.
What you don’t see in the sanctions list is who opted for which disposal. The panel may have decided to scratch the sanction based on submitted reports without appearing.