WHAT does it tell us about referees that so few of them have played their sport to a high standard? They are generally people who like to be the centre of attention, and having failed to gain it through their playing skills they try a different tack.

They also tend to be officious types who lack flair and are so thick-skinned that they don't mind having their parentage questioned on a regular basis. But none of that would matter if they had a genuine feel for the game developed through playing it.

Sadly, those who have tasted stardom don't wish to risk going from being praised to pilloried, so we have to put up with whatever whistle-blowers we can get and must never forget that without them there is no game.

But that doesn't mean we have to shy away from criticising them, as Sam Allardyce was clearly justified in doing on Wednesday night. But it's a rugby referee who has riled me - the New Zealander Steve Walsh, who ruined last Sunday's Wales v Scotland match by sending off Scott Murray.

There were shades of David Beckham's World Cup dismissal against Argentina in what Murray did as they both kicked out when on their backsides. The difference was that Beckham's was a petulant response to a fairly harmless transgression, whereas Murray's was an instantaneous reaction to being blatantly taken out off the ball.

I also refuse to accept that rugby players should be punished in just the same way as footballers for violent conduct as they play a far more physical game in which they expect the odd dust-up. All they would ask is that outright thuggery is outlawed, and I'll wager that Walsh was the only man on the field last Sunday who felt Murray deserved to go.

Murray accepted the decision like the true gent he is known to be, apologising before he departed, and may have reflected on the cruelty of life on his way to the touchline. One week you're man of the match in a glorious win against France, the next a split second's indiscretion brings ignominy.

Walsh looks the sort who spends hours in front of a mirror. His hair is as perfect as his knowledge of the laws and players had better be aware that he's going to enforce those laws rigorously. With him, as with most rugby referees I have seen this season, there is no such thing as using his own discretion in order to produce a better game.

The authorities are apparently determined to clamp down on foul play, but it is ludicrous for Murray, who had no malicious intent, to be banned for three games while two All Blacks got away with a double spear tackle which put the Lions captain out of the series.

ONCE when Somerset visited Durham I wrote a line about their lack of back-up bowling. This brought an enraged Kevin Shine to the Press box and he wasn't greatly placated when I pointed out that he was a frontline bowler, not a back-up man.

He has had other run-ins with journalists and there are cricket writers in Somerset who will be astonished by his appointment as England's bowling coach considering his time in charge at Taunton was marked by a steady decline in the county's fortunes.

He apparently used to describe bowlers as having "good wheels", whatever that means, and often reacted to perceived criticism by saying: "I'm a level four coach, you know."

On hearing of Shine's elevation, Somerset captain Ian Blackwell said: "He's very much a biomechanical bowling coach."

Yes, but can he communicate, motivate and inspire his charges to repeat the deeds of last summer?

CONSIDERING that their shooting skills have matched Dick Cheney's, it was not the most profound piece of analysis when Mick McCarthy observed this week that Sunderland's strikers were responsible for the team's plight.

But the blunt speaker from Barnsley appears to have landed himself in the soup recently for dropping barely-disguised hints about planning for the future, so he can't be blamed for falling back on statements of the obvious.

No doubt his marksmen will shoot Sunderland back up next season, then we'll discover whether they are any stronger for this year's experiences.

AS THIS country's debts pile up there is little sign of the grandiose plans for the staging of the 2012 Olympics being matched by extra funding for potential medal-winners. UK Sport initially said the target was to finish fourth in the medals table, no doubt hoping the promise of medals would bring more cash.

But now that the government realise this is over-ambitious they are pursuing the line that extra funding will not be available until sports governing bodies have demonstrated their ability to govern.

Given our penchant for prevarication it's just as well they've got six years to sort this out. But by then, of course, it will be too late for anyone who might have won a medal with a little more financial support.

Published: 17/02/2006