What do the touchies do?

[AlwaysGreen]

What do they do? What don't they do?
Oh, they do so many things they never stop. Oh, the things they do there, my stars.

 

[*Paul*]

I bet all the whingers in this thread getting their panties in a knot about touchies not doing anything would be the first up in arms if we gave the touch judges their own whistles and allowed them to make their calls directly instead of by proxy through the referee. Then it'd be all about shutting them up and how their calls are just about seeking the limelight. You know, the same accusations leveled at the guys in the middle today.

Leigh.

Nonsense. The LU community would reflect with quiet equanimity about the difficult nature of the task, how one's perception of events is coloured by team allegiances, and drawing on their own vast experience of officiating, be quite satisfied with the job being done.

 

[eozsmiles]

What's wrong with confident officials making the right call as it arises?

I bet you sit down to piss.

Nothing wrong with it, just it probably won't happen. Bill Harrigan was the last to do that and everyone called him a tool for having confidence.

If the touchie and ref don't have the confidence or ability to make confident and accurate calls on pretty obvious things at the moment ie Brett Morris in the GF, why are they suddenly going to get the confidence and ability to get it right in the near future? And if fans struggle to accept the mistakes now, why would they suddenly be cool with it, particularly as there will be more mistakes?

 

[clutch]

Nothing wrong with it, just it probably won't happen. Bill Harrigan was the last to do that and everyone called him a tool for having confidence.

If the touchie and ref don't have the confidence or ability to make confident and accurate calls on pretty obvious things at the moment ie Brett Morris in the GF, why are they suddenly going to get the confidence and ability to get it right in the near future? And if fans struggle to accept the mistakes now, why would they suddenly be cool with it, particularly as there will be more mistakes?

rule aren't suited to the technology.

slater's try for example in the manly semi I think. is it true the rule states that if players hand still has contact with the ball on the grounding, then it's try time? but he clearly hand no control of the ball and for 100 years prior to the intro of the video ref, it would always have been a no try. an in-goal referee would have adjudicated it that way.

with the slowing down of video frames, ridiculous decisions on tries are being awarded which would not be awarded by 9 out of 10 people if it was adjudicated by the naked eye at normal speed. furthermore, you'll also have referees that refer 4 out of every 5 tries to the video, and then the video ref slows it down to 1/10000000000000th frames per second to find a reason not to award it. sure, tries have become messy in the modern game with many coming from kicks, but this BS video decisions add to the anticipation is just that. it's ruining the game

get the on-field refs to make the decisions, and get the teams to request a review if they disagree. with the process I've suggested in the OP it may get some blokes like Foran in the NQ game to fess up straight away knowing that a challenge that fails will have implications for their team in game.

 

[newman]

Nonsense. The LU community would reflect with quiet equanimity about the difficult nature of the task, how one's perception of events is coloured by team allegiances, and drawing on their own vast experience of officiating, be quite satisfied with the job being done.

Post of the year.