Arrow (Sydney, NSW : 1916 - 1933), Saturday 9 June 1917, page 2


Examining for Referees

Mr. G. S. Elliott, (183 Glcbc-road. Glebe ! Point), writes: 'Being a constant reader of your I papers I noticed that the New South Wales I Rugby League wire short of referees. Co:isc- i qu;nlly, being desirous of taking the wltiulc, I I reported to the secretary of the League, by : whom I was to!J that I would have to pasj an ? examination. Quite right. A bjuk of rules 1 was given to me, a knowledge of which sug- j gested qualification to officiate c:; referee. I j r;;d the book thoroughly, and rvcnluaily had

us contents at my linger tips. 1:1 uuc time 1 rcCL-ivcd notice requesting me to attend an examination at the League rooms. 1 did so, sat, and was turned down. Why ? Not because I didn't know the rules ;? but because the examination was unfair. In the first place, I was asked questions that were not provided for in the book of rules (as determined by the League). Certainly I'll admit that the questions I am referring to do sometimes confront a referee in actual play, but while doing so I contend that such happenings (not provided for in the baat of rules) should be left to the discretion of the referee on the field, particularly as there are few referees who agree one with the other on incidental happenings. Then cgain the question asked of me by the examiners were delivered about five times quicker than it it would take to have them carried out on ihe field. Think of it. There were nine candidates besides myself who sat — none of whom passed the test. I believe a better, and certainly fairer way would be to have, say, five examiners (selected by the League), who were not referccing themselves. Such men would be more likely to measure judgment where it was merited. I think this is a matter that should be looked into, because it is a means of retarding the ambition of those desirous of doing ail they can for the advancement of the game.' Well Mr. Elliott, why not give publicity to some of the questions the learned society of referees formulated for your confounding. The public would be interested in the posers, and those of us who might not be of the public, would be equally interested, 50 why keep it all to yourself ?