|
|
Post by wiganred on May 25, 2016 16:20:49 GMT
If there is one rule I hate it's the current referral system to the video ref. Refs have to make a decision is it a 'no try' or it's a try. Most of the time it would be safer to say, send it upstairs I didn't see clearly enough, tell me the outcome. The current system is flawed, so many wrong decisions because there wasn't absolute proof to overturn it. It drives me mad at times.
|
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on May 25, 2016 19:32:33 GMT
I can see why people don't like it and it does seem to be unpopular. I don't have a problem with it though. It was introduced because of criticism that the on field refs had stopped making decisions and that sometimes the video ref can't tell any better than on field. So it either needs to stay as it is or bring in the refs call they used to use in Australia where they hand it back. Otherwise what do you do if the video is inconclusive?
The video ref should over rule if there is enough evidence it is wrong. The fact they make mistakes too shouldn't mean the whole thing is changed
Other thing I like about the current system is that it reinforces the authority of the on field ref and makes them take control
|
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on May 25, 2016 19:48:23 GMT
I can see why people don't like it and it does seem to be unpopular. I don't have a problem with it though. It was introduced because of criticism that the on field refs had stopped making decisions and that sometimes the video ref can't tell any better than on field. So it either needs to stay as it is or bring in the refs call they used to use in Australia where they hand it back. Otherwise what do you do if the video is inconclusive? The video ref should over rule if there is enough evidence it is wrong. The fact they make mistakes too shouldn't mean the whole thing is changed Other thing I like about the current system is that it reinforces the authority of the on field ref and makes them take control Totally agree. Ref makes decision and gives it,or refers it upstairs with his own view. if the video ref doesn't have enough evidence then neither do we,we're just guessing. Funnily enough,the only problem I had was when Thaler referred it to Uncle Albert ,with his recommendation and then rubbished the outcome. Thaler is our best ref but he was badly wrong. Either make a decision or hand it over with your best guess and keep schtum. We want to reach as close to 100% accuracy as possible and this is the best way |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2016 20:04:03 GMT
What we need is some form of bunker system they are currently using in the NRL, all the decisions are swift which in the SL is the last thing they are.
My biggest bug bare with the whole thing is that some games have a video ref and some don't, can't be a fair system when this is the case. Imagine on Friday if there is a highly contentious decision with 30 seconds left and the game hanging on it, give it the wrong way and it could cost Salford the top 8. Should be all games or no games.
|
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on May 25, 2016 20:39:30 GMT
The Thaler-Alibert spat was one of the funniest/cringeworthy/embarrassing/entertains (delete as applicable) things ever seen on a rugby pitch. Thaler was in the wrong to argue like he did but it must be frustrating when you've handed it on and the VR looks at the wrong bit and gets the decision based on that wrong too! But as you say once you've referred it you have to live with the decision. Makes it hard for a ref to penalise players for dissent when they have done that to the VR  ? I agree that it should be at all games. Problem is the number of cameras needed and that we haven't got enough refs. I think part of the reason for quicker decisions in NRL is the huge number of cameras they have making it clearer |
|
?