^ Indeed, I hope he has a few more years in him yet also - the rugby world needs him and more refs like him!
Interesting question re: salary. Without looking it up, I would guess referees are paid per match (obviously with match fees/expenses included) and the level of payment dependent on the level of the game (i.e. Club, Provincial, International etc.). The likes of Owens will command considerably higher payments I'm sure and will also make a decent living from the odd autobiography!!
"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things" - Yma o Hyd.
I found some reference per links below. I guess one could survive on it full time, but it would be a stretch from what the first link lists. The English PL figures are a lot better. Pete
Still, they don't really comment on the "extras" or "benefits" - including the expenses they receive. Top referees must be on a decent deal, with some great travel!!
"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things" - Yma o Hyd.
One man who might be making the move into the professional ranks soon is Wayne Barnes. The 25-year-old from the Forest of Dean is a barrister working out of Lincoln's Inn in London. "I wanted to get him through to the Premiership within two years," said High. "It took three. That's the reality of how difficult it can be. I've told him he could be the best referee in the world within five years. With all due respect, I doubt he'll ever be the world's best barrister."
And re salaries:
The sport committed to the concept of full-time referees before football with the first appointments in the mid-Nineties. England have five full-time referees – Chris White, Steve Lander, Roy Maybank, Dave Pearson and Tony Spreadbury – and are pushing for a sixth in Barnes. A top-flight, full-time referee would earn around £55,000 plus benefits. The starting salary would be about £45,000. The Premiership match fee for part-time referees is £420.
Barnes may not become the world's best barrister, particularly if he's reffing every week, but he'll almost certainly earn more than he will from refereeing...
^ There's definitely questionable refereeing worldwide and this is not just a question of poor ref'ing per se, but also interpretation of the laws. This is highlighted IMHO between Northern and Southern Hemispheres - therefore, it wouldn't be a bad idea to "import/employ international referees"... All good for the game. As also mentioned, it's a very complex game these days....... it just shouldn't be!
With regards to Barnes... yeah, yeah, thank you sir!! Makes sense his "other chosen" profession would be a lawyer!!
"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things" - Yma o Hyd.
Question of the week: Is a direct hand-off allowed (of course if the receiving man is behind the one giving), or does it always have to be a pass leaving hands and arriving hands no matter how slight the distance? Pete
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Source
Another strange one. This is per my memory from last week. Ball was passed as normal along the line and a man didn't see it coming. Hit him square in the head and bounced forward. Was recovered by the defense who ran with the ball. Whistle. Ref did not call play on and did not call a knock on. It ended up in a scrum for the defense. Was all that correct? If so I guess the ball hitting your head is not a knock on per the rules. Pete
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Source
prcscct wrote:Question of the week: Is a direct hand-off allowed (of course if the receiving man is behind the one giving), or does it always have to be a pass leaving hands and arriving hands no matter how slight the distance? Pete
If I understand you correctly, yes, a direct hand-off is allowed - an ideal example would be the set-up of a "Rolling" or "Driving-Maul". You can see this in the video below: -
prcscct wrote:Another strange one. This is per my memory from last week. Ball was passed as normal along the line and a man didn't see it coming. Hit him square in the head and bounced forward. Was recovered by the defense who ran with the ball. Whistle. Ref did not call play on and did not call a knock on. It ended up in a scrum for the defense. Was all that correct? If so I guess the ball hitting your head is not a knock on per the rules. Pete
Got to say I'd have to see that one to understand it fully. All I can say with 99% certainty, is that it would not have been a knock-on coming off his head - forward pass perhaps?
"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things" - Yma o Hyd.
You're right about the "Rolling" or "Driving-Maul", I had forgotten about that. My mind was focusing on open field running where I haven't seen one, at least not yet. Something like a reverse where a man running horizontally one way is passed by a man running full speed the other way and the ball is handed off. Pete
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Source
Many of you who know the game will find it amazing that my son used to play at 3, 11, 14 or 15.
When he started, he was the little fat kid, who they bunged into the front row. However, with the addition of rugby to his sporting activities, he slimmed right down, and soon became the fastest player in the team.
Even though he was a natural winger, his team was quite modern in that even the forwards were thin and fast, so he could still do a turn at No. 3 when required.
His biggest problem was that he couldn't kick a ball. In his last competitive match, he was moved to No. 15 (kicking can be fairly essential), but there was no need to panic (I was - I actually thought what a stupid move, and it could cost them the cup), but he actually played a blinder, and the cup was theirs.
I bet there aren't many who can claim to have played those 4 positions successfully.
Pete 
