An interview with the referee
ByAs the new era of openness and accountability for referees is upon us, I got my first opportunity to interview a referee, Chris Pollock, after the Crusaders vs Sharks game on Friday night. I’ve spoken to referees after games before, including a long conversation with Stu Dickinson last year, but until Friday these conversations have always been off the record.
The first thing I notice as I approach Chris is that none of the major print media outlets seem interested in him. In fact, after talking to Sky TV, it’s just me, a freelancer and a couple of students from the NZ School of Broadcasting who approach Chris.
Immediately I realize I’m leading this interview for all the others so I start off by introducing myself to Chris, who immediately asks if I’m related to David McBrearty, a former Air New Zealand Cup referee coach and my father. I think this is getting off to a good start.
First question is an easy one for Chris, in a game free from what assessors would call “critical incidents”, how had he enjoyed the game? Chris tells me that it was an enjoyable game to referee, but he would reserve judgment on his performance until he had checked the tape of the game later.
Thinking this is a fair, if slightly stock and meaningless answer, I press on with my sole “hard” question: There seem to have been a number of issues at scrum time, was this a case of being unable to initially identify the culprit or giving the players a chance to sort it out themselves?
“I thought pre-engagement they were very good and compliant,” he answers, “But after engagement it was very competitive. You had two international players going up against each other and just giving it a good crack.”
The other notable feature of the game, from a refereeing stand point, was the amount of chatter from the players. Referees are never short of advice, but from what I observed, this seemed to be a bit more than usual.
“Everyone’s in to wanting to have a crack,” says Chris, “It’d be boring if they didn’t.”
Finally I ask how he enjoys refereeing the Crusaders. Chris tells me they are a positive team who play an attractive brand of rugby and are always a pleasure to referee, which is a fairly pragmatic answer to give in the players’ tunnel under AMI Stadium.
As I conclude, I can’t resist a cheeky question about his refereeing colleagues and how they are to work with. Chris’s face suddenly breaks into a broad smile. “Terrible, just awful these Canterbury boys,” he says grinning mischievously.
I look up and spot Kane McBride, the TMO, over Chris’s shoulder who returns the grin and I know that these guys share a wonderful passion and camaraderie for one of the toughest jobs in rugby.
As I reflect on the interview, it was somewhat strange to pick apart the referee’s performance and then ask him to account for certain aspects of his game, but giving the fans an incite into how the referees think and critique their own performance can only make the game more accessible. However, as a referee myself I will try to extend a certain level of professional courtesy to the referees and refrain from asking questions like, “Why did you miss so many forward passes?” as was suggested by one reporter after the game.
Similar Posts:
- Referee “merit” selection policy places refs in lose-lose situation
- I’d forgotten how well behaved rugby players are
- Referees attempting to clean up rugby’s show piece
- Does rugby need two referees?
- Umaga blasts referees before signing off
The An interview with the referee by Hamish McBrearty, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
