It happens. A referee makes a decision that you as a player or coach really are not happy about. To be precise, you will not be happy about the decision that the team of three referees has made. We’re not going to play the numbers game now of ‘three versus one’ as getting the right result is the most important thing. The players are the most important people on the mat, and a good referee team should essentially be invisible.
What should you do?
Well, what NOT to do is to do what the minority of players and coaches do: Abuse, attempt to intimidate, showboat (e.g. every throw is one which almost broke their neck, every decision is wrong…). This won’t help you at all. It has no place in any part of judo or even sport for that matter and has to go. In addition, if you’re not prepared to lose you are not totally in tune with what shiai is designed for as part of the judo pedagogy.
However, I never want a player to lose because of a bad decision.
Typically, most errors are picked up by the referee team. Score the wrong side? That’s a typical one. It will be noticed and corrected. If it isn’t then I’ve never been averse to a coach pointing out the possibility (other referees may feel differently about this). Note this is entirely different to trying to pre-empt things: Calling out scores mid-throw, calling for penalties, complaining about grips… don’t do that!
Let’s assume that something really is not right. Call the Referee In Charge to the mat (typically done via the Competition Controller). You want to do this as soon as possible and certainly before the next contest if possible. Explain your grievance in detail. Bonus points for not being abusive, of course.
A common complaint is “What’s the point, nothing gets changed anyway”. This is false as I have witnessed decisions being changed of a correct challenge by a coach. There is no referee conspiracy that I have yet seen to try and protect a decision. The whole point of having a team of three in the first place is to accept the fact that we are all human (honestly, we are) and that we are just trying to minimise errors and consolidate opinion. After all, scoring is subjective – Was that mostly on the back or not?
The RIC will then speak to the team in question to assess what to do, and certainly to advise for in the future. Now, the RIC can’t try and influence the referees to change their mind (say, who scored what?). But what if the team has made an error regarding the rules? If the rule is correctly pointed out, NOW do they change their minds?
The RIC is also called by the team themselves when a controversial decision is perhaps about to be made and they want back-up ready! A direct hansoku-make is typical. Although all three referees must agree before this is ‘awarded’, it can be controversial if the reason is not totally clear. Head dives are pretty obvious, endangering the spine with headlocks not always so obvious when in newaza.
When I have had abuse it is due to this last one, and in fact for not awarding hansoku-make. As just described, all three referees MUST agree. So not only must have they have observed the incident from their angle on the mat, they must ALSO agree that intent was there. Not one I’ve dealt with, but one incident talked about concerned a player alleged to have kicked their opponent when getting up off the ground… the angle meant there was no way all of the referees could have seen it.
So, a coach may demand a hansoku-make for Kani Basami, but what if the referee feels it was more of a result of two simultaneous techniques? (One player going for a rear sacrifice throw at the same time as the other turning sideways for, say, ouchi gari?). Players collapse in a bit of a heap and the legs are in a ‘sort of’ Kani Basami position, but is the intent there?
The coaches I most have respect for are those that are balanced. One minute I can see them calling for a score which was not given, but the next they are also telling their player to get a move on! (In a nice way, of course). They recognise that referee decisions that are bad will come and go, but ultimately the player can make it all very easy: Win decisively by Ippon with a crisp technique. Job done.
Certainly you never want it to go to the referees’ decision: Golden Score has been reduced to two minutes for seniors now, less for juniors. As the decision is based purely on the Golden Score contest time, that is NOT much time for either player to look far superior to the other unless they get a score. (Currently, this superiority is judged purely on ‘number of attacks’ which in my humble opinion could be improved, but that’s one for another post).
