The Rosslyn Park School 7s is the largest rugby tournament in the world, with over 14,000 boys and girls from 11 to 18, competing annually. So this week I joined the significant ‘law’ (my collective noun, better than ‘confusion’) of referees, testing my ham-strings alongside talented (rapid!) young rugby players. (Note to self. Yoga?)
In between matches I wandered the many pitches watching matches of all ages, while around me I heard tactical pleas from coaches and running commentaries from spectators. As you might imagine, emotions can run high, and it’s part of sport for referee decisions to be scrutinised, queried, and occasionally challenged. I may, in the past, have been guilty (as player, coach, and parent) for blaming the referee as the sole cause of a disappointing outcome.
Much as we’d like to operate with 100% accuracy none of us are going to be error free, so a mild pathos appeal here. There are 21 laws in rugby. Sub-sections and associated elements add up to over 300 laws, sub-laws et al. So, for example, when the ball goes into touch for a line-out, there are 85 elements the referee needs to know, of which there are 15 specific offences they need to look out for, 6 of which are full penalties. Just saying.
One parent I stood next to this week was very vexed, chuntering to his neighbours, his retriever tugging the leash behind him as he strode up the touchline, cursing the ref for “the obvious penalty”.
And this is where my metaphor begins. In the heat of the moment, it’s easy to assume a call is wrong. Spectators, like leaders, often operate from a partial or differing perspective, without full visibility of every detail.
Leaders are sometimes coaches, sometimes spectators, and usually on the side-line of ‘corporate matches’. Tactics and inspiration have been given before the whistle. Execution is delegated and devolved to those on the pitch. Decisions are made in real-time, considering the specific context at hand and applying relevant policies (laws) or guidelines with flexibility (and in the case of rugby refs, materiality, and empathy).
So from the perspective of the ‘touchline’ it’s inevitable that snap judgements and assumptions can lead to miscommunication, mistrust and frustration.
Whether on the pitch, touchline, or workplace, we must beware the dangers of operating on assumptions. Our ‘good view’ may lack crucial detail. This can lead to missed opportunities, bad calls, and a team feeling unheard, just as a referee makes a judgment based on a distant view, lacking the intricate details of the action.
Instead strive for a clear, comprehensive understanding of situations. Communicate effectively and transparently to demystify decisions and minimising the space for assumption to fester. The shift from assumption to understanding can transform our approach. And as a leader this perspective builds trust, commitment, more cohesive teams, and successful outcomes.
And as for my chuntering parent? I empathised, while mentioning that the law he was so vexed about had changed 3 years ago. But given World Rugby like to change the laws every year it was an easy mistake to make, and ultimately ‘sport’ was the winner!
