Perceptions of NZ Sports Officials Andrew Hercus, Jan Charbonneau, Ron Garland, Warren Smith

Introduction Without independent and unbiased officials and officiating, any sport would fall into disarray. While the crucial role played by sports officials is widely acknowledged, there has been little research other than anecdotal about how sports officials are perceived by the general public.

Survey A mail survey was sent to a random sample of 1800 New Zealanders to determine their overall opinion of sports officials, their performance on the field, the influence they have over the outcome of the game, and whether they should be held accountable for their decisions. Respondents were also asked the sources they used to obtain their sports information and the level of abuse faced by sports officials.

Response Rate A total of 692 valid questionnaires were processed for an effective response rate of 40%. Not surprisingly, respondents indicated Rugby, Netball, Cricket and Soccer as the top four favourite sports.

Level of Involvement in Favourite Sport

Overall Opinion of Sports Officials

Overall Opinion by Favourite Sport

Characteristics of Effective Officiating Based on previous studies into officiating effectiveness, a suite of general characteristics required for effective officiating was obtained. Respondent were asked to rank the importance of each of the following characteristics for officials in their favourite sport: makes impartial decisions makes clear rulings makes accurate decisions understands the rules of the game applies the rules consistently maintains control of the game & players

Impartial Decisions

Clear Rulings

Accurate Decisions

Rules of the Game

Consistent Application of Rules

Maintaining Control

Implications Clearly, respondents were concerned with officials’ understanding and consistent application of the rules of the game with 88% and 81% respectively Results for the remaining four characteristics were comparable, with 69 – 72% of respondents judging them to be extremely important.

Evaluation of Officiating Performance Respondents were asked to assess the effectiveness of the main official (referee, umpire or judge) in a recent game of their favourite sport using the same suite of characteristics. Results were analysed for the sample as a whole as well as the Top 4 Favourite Sports with comments made when substantive differences were noted.

Performance – Impartial Decisions

Performance – Clear Rulings

Main Official in Rugby – Clear Rulings

Performance – Accurate Decisions

Performance – Understanding Rules

Performance – Consistent Application

Performance – Maintaining Control

Implications CharacteristicsPositiveNeutralNegative Impartial Decisions Clear Rulings Accurate Decisions Understanding of Rules Consistent Application Maintains Control

Influence of Sports Officials Anecdotally, there is growing concern that officials may have a disproportionate influence over the outcome of the game and are not held accountable or called upon to explain their decisions in a public forum. Respondents were asked their opinion as to the amount of influence officials exert over the outcome of the game. They were also asked whether officials should be accountable for their decisions and, if so, to whom.

Influence over Outcome of Game

Differences by Favourite Sport, Level of Interest & Level of Involvement

Implications The majority of respondents believed the amount of influence officials have over the outcome the game was ‘just right’ however almost one-third believed the influence was ‘too much’. Direct involvement in sport at some level served to amplify the sense that officials may be exerting more influence than acceptable.

Accountability of Sports Officials Respondents were asked whether they believed professional or amateur officials should be required to explain or justify their decisions and if so, to whom. Respondents were given guidance as to what constitutes professional sports officials e.g. Super 14 referees and amateur sports officials e.g. local club referees.

Professional Officials

Who should Professional Officials be Accountable to?

Amateur Officials

Who should Amateur Officials be Accountable to?

Implications These results indicate that amateur officials are not held to the same standard of accountability as professional officials. However, respondents believe both amateur and professional officials should primarily be accountable for those directly involved in the sport (players and coaches).

Officials and the Media Respondents were asked whether professional, international and amateur sports officials should be available for questioning by the media after games. Respondents were given guidance as to what constitutes international sports officials e.g. Olympic judges.

Professional and International Officials

International Officials and Media Questioning

Amateur Officials and Media Questioning

Implications The expectations of the general public that amateur officials will justify their decisions to the media are substantially lower than those for paid professional and internationally ranked officials. Not surprisingly, respondents with officiating experience disagreed or strongly disagreed with officials being available for questioning

Questioning of Professional Officials by Experience

Sources of Sports Information Many things can influence opinions about the performance of sports officials besides an individual’s personal experience with the sport. Respondents were asked the amount of notice they paid to a range of sources of sports information (commentary or discussion) and how trustworthy they believed the sources to be.

Notice Taken of Match Commentators

Notice Taken of Players

Notice Taken of Coaches

Notice Taken of Journalists

Notice Taken of Friends and Associates

Notice Taken of Online Social Networks

Notice Taken of TV Sports Shows

Implications These results suggest that respondents take more notice of sources closest to the action at the time of play – players, coaches and match commentators. As such, match commentators in particular have potential to influence perceptions of officiating performance for the viewing public.

Trustworthiness of Selected Sources Respondents were asked their opinions as to the trustworthiness of a range of sources of sports information. Trustworthiness was defined as knowledgeable, accurate, and impartial. Coaches and players were rated as the most trustworthy with 61% and 60% respectively rating them as quite or very trustworthy Not surprisingly, TV sports shows and online social networks were judged the least trustworthy (Figures 47 and 46).

Trustworthiness of Match Commentators

Trustworthiness of Players

Trustworthiness of Coaches

Trustworthiness of Journalists

Trustworthiness of Friends and Associates

Trustworthiness of Online Social Networks

Trustworthiness of TV Sports Shows

Implications The findings suggest that respondents feel that sources closest to the action at the time of play are more trustworthy – players, coaches and match commentators. Also interesting is the low proportion of respondents who believe any of the sources of sports information are ‘very trustworthy’ and both the limited amount of notice and trustworthiness assigned to online sources and television shows. When analysed by the Top 4 Favourite Sports, the only difference found was relative to the trustworthiness of coaches.

Trustworthiness of Coaches by Favourite Sport

Media as Sources of Sports Information Respondents were asked to indicate, on average, how many hours per week they spend watching, reading or listening to sports coverage on each of the following media: television, magazines, newspapers, radio and the Internet. Respondents were categorised into non-users (not at all), light users (overall up to 3 hours), moderate users (overall up to 10 hours) and heavy users (more than 10 hours).

TV as Source of Sports Information

Magazines as Source of Sports Information

Newspapers as Source of Sports Information

Radio as Source of Sports Information

The Internet as Source of Sports Information

Implications Newspapers, television and radio appear to be the preferred source of sports information overall, however the majority of respondents are light users of these media. Television is the main overall source of sports information.

Abuse of Officials Abuse has been identified in previous studies as a source of stress and burnout for officials and one of the reasons why individuals cease officiating. Respondents were asked whether they believed the level of abuse of sports officials has increased or decreased over the past 5 years. They were asked about the acceptability of varying levels of abuse and the impact of abuse on their own enjoyment of the game.

Abuse of Officials over Last Five Years

Abuse of Officials by Gender

Abuse of Officials by Officiating Experience

Abuse of Officials by Involvement in Sport

Acceptability of Varying Levels of Abuse What constitutes abuse towards sports officials will vary depending on the individual observing the abuse, the particular abusive behaviour, setting, and parties involved. Respondents were asked to indicate acceptance of different types of abuse identified in previous studies.

Loudly Disagreeing with Officials

Loudly Disagreeing by Gender

Players Answering Back

Smart or Funny Comments

Smart or Funny Comments by Gender

Commentators Questioning Officials’ Decisions

Throwing Objects at Officials

Throwing Objects at Officials by Favourite Sport

Nasty or Derogatory Comments

Nasty or Derogatory Comments by Favourite Sport

Verbal Abuse

Verbal Abuse by Favourite Sport

Journalists Undermining Officials

Journalists Undermining Officials by Gender

Implications Overall, respondents felt the varying levels of abuse presented were unacceptable. Respondents expressed the strongest opinions about the unacceptability of throwing objects, making derogatory or nasty comments, verbally abusing officials or players answering back. Interestingly, while 38% of respondents felt it was not acceptable for commentators to question officials’ decisions, 39% felt this was acceptable behaviour. Unexpectedly, Rugby fans had a lower tolerance of specific abusive behaviours (throwing objects, making nasty or derogatory comments, or verbal abuse) than Netball, Cricket or Soccer fans.

Effect of Verbal Abuse of Officials on Enjoyment

Effect of Verbal Abuse on Enjoyment by Gender

Effect of Players’ Verbal Abuse on Enjoyment

Players’ Verbal Abuse by Favourite Sport

Effect of Commentators on Enjoyment

Effect of Commentators on Enjoyment by Gender

Implications Undoubtedly various forms of abuse towards officials have an impact on spectators’ enjoyment of the game. For females, previous intolerance of abusive behaviours has a notable negative effect on their overall enjoyment of the game.

Previous Officiating Experience

Reasons for no longer being a Sports Official

Overall Opinion of Sports Officials Overall, the majority of respondents expressed positive opinions of sports officials, most notably for fans of Cricket. The more passionate the individual was about their favourite sport, the more positive their opinion of sports officials.

Performance on the Field Respondents felt officials’ understanding of the rules of the game and their consistent application were more important to effective officiating than other characteristics such as maintaining control over both the game and players. When asked to rate the performance of the main official in a recent game of their favourite sport, respondents gave overall high ratings. The more positive respondents’ opinion of officials was generally, the higher the rating. However, the main official in Rugby was rated substantially lower than their counterpart in Cricket when it came to understanding and application of the rules of the game.

Influence and Accountability Almost one third of respondents felt that sports officials exerted too much influence over the outcome of the game. Direct involvement in sport as a player, administrator or official served to amplify the belief that officials may be exerting more influence than acceptable. The general public expected Professional sports officials to be more accountable for their decisions than their Amateur counterparts. Respondents believe both Professional and Amateur officials, if to be held accountable, should primarily be accountable to those directly involved in the sport (players and coaches) rather than spectators and the media.

Sources of Sports Information Respondents took more notice of information sources closely involved in the on-field action (players, coaches and match commentators) and also judged these sources to be the most trustworthy. Rugby officials were considered significantly more trustworthy than their Cricket, Netball or Soccer counterparts. Little notice was taken of TV sports shows and online social networks and this was also reflected in the lower degree of trust in these sources. Respondents relied more on traditional channels for their sports information (television, newspaper and radio), with television being the predominant source.

Abuse faced by Sports Officials Two thirds of respondents felt that abuse of sports officials had increased over the last five years, a view held more strongly by females. The vast majority of respondents judged a range of abusive behaviours towards officials as unacceptable. Respondents expressed the strongest opinion about the unacceptability of abusive behaviour towards sports officials when that behaviour was directly aimed at the sports official, namely, throwing of objects at officials and verbal abuse of officials. Females and Rugby fans had substantially lower levels of tolerance towards abuse directed at sports officials. Abuse directed at sports officials had a significantly negative effects on respondents’ enjoyment of the game – especially so for females.

The primary piece of research was undertaken via a general public survey which was supplemented by three other general areas of analysis: Newspapers, television commentary and interviews.

Newspapers

Rugby Match Commentary Analysis

Netball Commentary Responses

Implications Results indicate a high propensity by media commentators to report officials’ performance negatively. Neutral commentary (informational reporting, no positive or negative judgement by commentator on specific decisions) was also prevalent and positive comments were cited as significantly lower than both other categories.