Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - Posts

Refereeing vs Playing

My rugby team didn't have a league match on Saturday, so we arranged a friendly against a team that used to be local rivals, but who we're now several leagues above.

Unfortunately, they didn't just turn up short of a couple of players, but short of the referee they were supposed to arrange.  The former problem was easily solved - we had players to spare - but the latter is more of an issue: technically, if there is no certified referee available, the game cannot go on for insurance purposes.  In a bending of the rules I was asked to ref: I've refereed half a dozen games in the past - a clearer case of poacher turned gamekeeper you'll be hard-put to find - and while I was disappointed that I couldn't play, it was better that everyone else got a game.  That said, I gathered everyone around and explained the legal situation; I asked everyone playing to signify that they gave up the right to sue me since I was not holding myself out to have expertise in the field; I said that scrums were uncontested and rucking players out was a no-go; and I said that the first time anyone threw a punch the game was off.

What strikes me when I ref is that the things that are so very easy become hard.  When playing, I am relaxed and instinctive in spotting errors and offences.  I see virtually all of them without difficulty.  When refereeing, I am playing a different game, comprising balancing twin elements of spotting problems and ensuring a fun game.  I find it much harder, and freely admit that I have more difficulty seeing knock-ons in particular when following the play from the refereeing position.  Clearly, my brain has a "playing rugby" mode which is very different from the "refereeing rugby" mode.  I'm much better and more relaxed in the former.

That said, I was pretty pleased with the results: two of the five tries in the game came when I was playing advantage, which people notice and comment on as A Good Thing.  The scrum count was moderate, the penalty count very low, the play generally uninterrupted and both sides kept the complaints to a minimum.  When a ref gets clapped off the pitch and slapped on the back it's usually a good sign.  But I was unhappy with my enforcement of the offside laws: in the first half, I would forget to check that forwards were joining the breakdown from behind the rear foot, and I am sure I missed a few.  The binding of the loose forwards was a problem for me.  And I was disappointed that I couldn't stop both sides handling the ball on the ground: of only about 10 penalties in the game, two thirds were for that.

And I was, I admit, secretly delighted that in my absence our usual strongest areas - ball retention, clearing out and turnovers at the breakdown - were spectacularly terrible.  Nyuck nyuck.

Cobain is no Elvis

With Forbes reporting that Cobain made more money, posthumously, than Elvis over the last year, there was a whole "ha ha boomers, we da boss now" thing.  This was daft for two reasons.  One is that Kurt's meteoric rise was largely a one-off, due to the wicked witch of the west coast Courtney Love selling a share in his back catalogue to a rights management company (look forward to hearing Nirvana advertising iPods and coffee real soon now).

The other reason is that, if we are going to put someone up against The King, then why don't we pick someone better than a junked-out smackhead who made one-and-a-half really rather good albums?  Look, I was there with my plaid shirt and my goatee and my ripped jeans, but Lithium, Smells Like Teen Spirit and In Bloom are up therewith Guns'n'Roses' November Rain for most annoyingly overplayed track of the last twenty years.  Why?  Because if you want to play a Nirvana track on MTV2, it has to be those, Heart-Shaped Box or You Know You're Right, with an honourable mention for the unplugged session's The Man Who Sold The WorldThe Mighty Cornholio will back me up on this: you can't put that up against even the first three or four years of Elvis' recording career.  I, personally, might be rather fond of Nirvana's work (even Incesticide), as well as the stuff by Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam and the Stone Temple Pilots it helped popularise.  But I wouldn't claim that his impact will be anything like that of the man who changed the face of rock music.

Anyway, here are my High Fidelity-style top 5 albums released in 1991 that were better than Nevermind:

The Teenage Fanclub - Bandwagonesque.
My Bloody Valentine - Loveless
Massive Attack - Blue Lines
Primal Scream - Screamadelica
Soundgarden - Badmotorfinger