|
|
Post by SalfordSlim on Sept 16, 2018 15:51:15 GMT
Leeds have their own screen up for every home game I think, but can only use it for video ref decisions when the game is on sky. The screen that was up for Salford/Toronto I presume was for the Sale game the next day. quote I think you misread my post. My point was that there WASN'T a screen up for our game against Toronto yet we were a televised Sky game. Isn't it compulsory for there to be a big game during live games? Can't remember the last time it wasn't there for the Try/No Try decisions. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2018 16:00:06 GMT
They don't put a screen up for middle 8s games, even when there is a video ref. No idea why.
|
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Sept 16, 2018 19:23:50 GMT
They don't put a screen up for middle 8s games, even when there is a video ref. No idea why. Cost |
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on Sept 18, 2018 14:35:58 GMT
I think Child has been dropped for this weekends games
|
|
|
|
Post by salford1961 on Sept 18, 2018 16:05:31 GMT
I think Child has been dropped for this weekends games If so, that's an admission of culpability from the RFL. Pity it doesn't get the two points back the boys should have got. |
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Sept 18, 2018 21:23:46 GMT
How does Child being demoted and Bussey being banned for 10 matches plus being banished by Toronto fit with the conspiracy theories? 😉
|
|
|
|
Post by osrd on Sept 18, 2018 22:04:26 GMT
How does Child being demoted and Bussey being banned for 10 matches plus being banished by Toronto fit with the conspiracy theories? 😉 Child is the video ref for the Cas v Wakefield match,is that a demotion? There is no way that the Match Review Panel could not have given Bussey and long ban for the two incidents that he was involved with so the conspiracy theory doesn’t come into in my opinion. I couldn’t go to Leeds but of the viewing that I have seen on several occasions and Ian Watson’s comments on the incident just prior to the tackle on Richie Myler leads me to believe that Child made a couple of mistakes that may well have influenced the result. The heirarchy don’t need to demote Child,all they need to do is to say if or not they saw the same incidents as everyone else did and if they thought that a mistake had been made. |
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Sept 18, 2018 22:25:27 GMT
How does Child being demoted and Bussey being banned for 10 matches plus being banished by Toronto fit with the conspiracy theories? 😉 Child is the video ref for the Cas v Wakefield match,is that a demotion? There is no way that the Match Review Panel could not have given Bussey and long ban for the two incidents that he was involved with so the conspiracy theory doesn’t  come into in my opinion. I couldn’t go to Leeds but of the viewing that I have seen on several occasions and Ian Watson’s comments on the incident just prior to the tackle on Richie Myler leads me to believe that Child made a couple of mistakes that may well have influenced the result. The heirarchy don’t need to demote Child,all they need to do is to say if or not they saw the same incidents as everyone else did and if they thought that a mistake had been made. I was only (mostly) kidding. I agree they had no choice about Bussey As for child, I was just going off what I’d seen on Twitter. It’s a funny one demoting refs. On the one hand there have to be consequences for poor performance. Players will (should?) be dropped if they make enough mistakes so there should also be consequences for refs. Especially if they alter the outcome of games (as this appears to have done - not sure if the Myler one should have been a pen but pretty sure we should have had one just before). That said you don’t want refs terrified of making mistakes as that will lead to worse performances and fewer people coming forward to be a ref. I think you have to be made of pretty hard stuff to be a referee but the Ian smith talks at offload sessions show the real consequences of the abuse and pressure on people’s health. With the TV analysis and sky’s constant seeking of controversy the pressure in them is huge and I don’t think the RFL have got the training and performance management right yet. I’ve been on a journey with my views about referees and still complain about them during games. But having reffed junior rugby it has shown me how hard it is. I wouldn’t be a SL ref for any amount of money 😂 |
|
|
|
Post by woody74 on Sept 19, 2018 6:36:57 GMT
I honestly think that the game has got to the stage where we need 2 refs in top tier RL (super league). It works in the nrl and as mentioned, in this day and age of detailed sky analysis, refs are under constant scrutiny and then hammered for making mistakes. I don't think this would make the game slower. Players would adapt and it would relieve the pressure on the other official.
|
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on Sept 19, 2018 8:38:27 GMT
Carnster,you mention referees health and welfare. I stress that I’m not underestimating that.
All jobs carry pressure and scrutiny to some degree. Refs choose to put themselves centre of attention,either at park level or on tv. You have to assume therefore that there is something in that level of attention that they enjoy.................except when they are criticised.
I couldn’t referee or umpire (quiet Estagnol) because I wouldn’t take the criticism .
My point is that it goes with the territory and that’s clear from the start.
My problem with Child and his ‘Myler’ decision is that refs are steered from an early age to avoid giving clear match defining decisions,unless it’s totally blatant.
That incident wasn’t,and even more relevant given that he didn’t blow at the other end.
In my book,he enjoys giving attention seeking decisions
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2018 12:27:28 GMT
Carnster,you mention referees health and welfare. I stress that I’m not underestimating that. All jobs carry pressure and scrutiny to some degree. Refs choose to put themselves centre of attention,either at park level or on tv. You have to assume therefore that there is something in that level of attention that they enjoy.................except when they are criticised. I couldn’t referee or umpire (quiet Estagnol) because I wouldn’t take the criticism . My point is that it goes with the territory and that’s clear from the start. My problem with Child and his ‘Myler’ decision is that refs are steered from an early age to avoid giving clear match defining decisions,unless it’s totally blatant. That incident wasn’t,and even more relevant given that he didn’t blow at the other end. In my book,he enjoys giving attention seeking decisions 👆😱 |
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on Sept 19, 2018 12:45:41 GMT
Plumb,bang in front,should’ve given you out the previous ball but,good natured as ever,I gave you the benefitAs you rightly say it was 👆👆👆
|
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Sept 19, 2018 17:53:13 GMT
Bonita
I think it was me who said about the health issue. You’re right, to be a ref you must be able to cope with the criticism and I can’t believe there is anyone who goes into refereeing who doesn’t know they’re going to cop some flack and won’t last long if you can’t. But I do think the pressure on them has grown. The amount of abuse at games and on social media is massive. Not sure if the abuse st games I’d aby worse than it used to be
I genuinely don’t think they are significantly (if at all) worse than they were in the past but the level of scrutiny has increased massively. This is added to the level of stick at games that they already had
One thing they have in their favour is that the players are still relatively respectful compared to football. Respect for officials is still considered essential at junior and community club level as it should be
Genuine question - are they taught to only give blatant decisions if match changing? I can see some logic in that but I’ve never heard or seen that anywhere official. Should all decisions not have the same level of certainty and the official should give the right decision regardless of when it happens? The MCB try at Toronto is a good example of that. It ended up being the difference between winning and losing for both teams but happened in the middle of the game. if that was in the last second, would it be a worse decision? If the ‘only if blatant’ rule was applied would that mean that only a totally blatant knock on should be given or only a blatant ok try should be given? Not trying to be argumentative, just interested in how that is applied
|
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on Sept 19, 2018 18:53:49 GMT
Firstly,apologies to Carnster,completely my fault.
I agree with most of what you’ve said.
My understanding is that the referees groups that meet regularly to discuss points of law do have,not exactly a protocol,but an understanding that you don’t decide games unless it’s blatant.
I agree entirely with your point about MCB and that turned out to be decisive.
I’m talking about last 5 minutes.
In a sense ,there is no difference except there’s no time to recover which is why they view it differently. In any event the MCB incident was a relatively understandable genuine mistake whereas the last minute penalty is closer to the understanding I was referring to.
|
|
