SHOULD REFEREES DO POST-MATCH MEDIA TO EXPLAIN DECISIONS?

IN RUGBY, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For some it's a try off first phase, for others a defensive set with the clock in the red and the attacking side down a point. But where we can agree is when it comes to the communication skills of our top referees.

- ALEX SPINK FREELANCE RUGBY WRITER

To listen to Luke Pearce working a game, talking the players through the 80 minutes with authority, empathy and clear instruction, is a joy. For Pearce now, read Nigel Owens, Wayne Barnes and others before. Rugby is well served by its match officials and the spectacle enhanced for paying punters.

So why remove their voice when they leave the field? Where contentious moments need explanation, who better to offer it?

Some will say this puts them in an invidious position. That coaches get to watch video replays before calling out decisions that don't meet with their approval. Refs make calls in real time. To then put them in front of a camera is unfair.

That is to underestimate the game's top officials. Just as they have what it takes to make judgements in the heat of the moment, so they are equipped to explain them after.

Of course, match officials need protection from the worst excesses of social media. Some have left the game over abuse, a deplorable state of affairs. But if referees are happy to talk, and to improve our understanding of the game as a result, they should certainly be encouraged to do so.