Today I would like to discuss a referee’s interaction with the public in certain delicate situations. I have adapted this week’s column contents from a very interesting article that was uploaded on the website www.officiating.com.

I am sure that for many of you who are referees, there are plenty of times when you are not in the company of other fellow referees, for example at work, at family gatherings, in restaurants, etc.

In these instances, many times the conversation at these places comes around to sports and, before one knows it, someone is attacking the role or performance of referees. Sometimes people will deliberately make negative comments whilst knowing fully well that you are a referee.

This is usually done either to try to lose your temper and composure or to see if they can bring out information they can use later to degrade referees.

At times, however, the person doing the ‘attack’ may have no idea that you are a referee and the comments can be even more spiteful and mean in the referees’ regard.

So how should you react faced by such a situation? Should you get up and leave the room so you do not start an argument or should you simply sit there with your mouth shut, happy that it is not you they are talking about?

Foreign veteran and seasoned referees as well as instructors have stated and stressed highly that in these instances one should always try as much as possible (although sometimes this is quite impossible given the frequent lack of readiness by people to have their arguments ‘counter-attacked’) to adopt one stance, that of speaking up on behalf of the whole refereeing community even though in a smart way. There is a time and a place for everything, and a right way and a wrong way to do it.

Here follows some rights and wrongs, adapted from various seminars I have attended as well as various specialised articles I have read in the past.

Right: Ask them if they would like more information. Most people are naturally curious and cannot resist an offer to learn something.

Wrong: Ask them if they have ever refereed. To be honest I was quite surprised when I heard this advice as many a times I adopted this strategy. The reason for this advice is that it is easy to fall into the “you cannot know if you have never done it” trap. Besides, taking this aggressive stance will automatically put the people opposite on the defensive.

Right: Ask them if they saw the action/s in question. Too many times, people base their comments on hearsay (this usually would have been multiplied in intensity because an incident, at times, adds-on various ‘side-elements’ (that never occurred) as it is recounted from one person to another) or what they read in the newspaper.

If that is the case, a correct description of the play might help them realise on their own that the incident could have been handled properly. One should remember (and this is, in my honest opinion, one major flaw of the present rules, vis-à-vis referees, adopted by most federations) that most referees are not allowed to speak to the media and therefore only one side of the story often makes its way into print or onto the airwaves.

Wrong: Ask them what they know about rules and mechanics. Again, attacking their intelligence or knowledge can only increase the possibility of turning a fire into an inferno.

Right: Turn them from accuser into questioner. The natural response to a comment from you such as, “I know why the officials did what they did,” will be, “Why?” If nothing else, it will stop them from grumbling for a little while.

Wrong: Speak as if you are an expert when actually you do not know what you are talking about. It is noble to defend referees, but adding misinformation on top of misinformation will surely make matters worse. If the play in question is about a sport or a level with which you have no experience, a better comment is, “I probably know less about that sport than you, but I can tell you what it is like to be a referee.”

Right: Acknowledge that mistakes may be made. It is foolish to declare that referees are perfect. Even if it were the case, no one would believe it. Try using some form of compassion, such as, “If you are correct and the referees missed it, I will bet you the same referees today feel miserable about it and would really like to play-over the incident again and take the correct decision.”

Wrong: Never agree with the accusers. People will easily think you are an expert if they find you are an ally. If you say, “You’re right; that referee is terrible,” it shortens the leap they have to make to add, “But even he is not as bad as Mr. X (another fellow referee).” Even if you have a low opinion of the referee in question, try to keep your opinion to yourself.

Right: Thank them for listening. You may not win them over, but let them know you appreciate that they have at least considered another point of view.