The article on “Arguments on the Field” made fascinating reading (TMID, 17 February).

Being brought up on the Rugby Union code I find it difficult to understand that a soccer referee should expect to be insulted and involved in arguments with the payers, and more so the coaches.

I was always taught that soccer was a gentlemen’s game played by hooligans, but Rugby Union was a hooligans game played by gentlemen. I was taught from my early days that one never argued with the referee and the mild “Oh Referee” was jokingly made, and the strongest complaint made. Mind you some of the language used by the players in the set scrums to their own players and “the enemy” did leave something to be desired.

On one occasion I was a spectator at a local team “Derby” between Bristol and Gloster when the spectator next to me kept asking why the referee made certain decisions, so I asked him if he did not really understand the game. He told me he was a qualified soccer referee whose game had been cancelled so he decided to come to see what rugby was all about.

He was amazed that none of the players questioned the referee’s decisions as when he was refereeing every decision he made was questioned, and argued over. I explained that on the rare occasions a rugby player had to be sent off the field he was given a compulsory 30-day ban? no appeal and if one was made an official complaint would only incur a longer ban. After the match I took him into the club house for a drink, and he was amazed to see both teams, spectators and referee enjoying a pint (or six) together. He said he always had to leave his matches immediately to avoid trouble. How 30 men who had been “hammering” each other on the field could be acting in such a friendly

fashion was beyond his

comprehension.