Captain's Challenge is a go in 2017 - 7th Tackle

[T-Boon]

Imagine how good the game could be again if the video ref/bunker/captains challenge was abolished.

Back to the on field refs decision only.

The game would have a massive weight off its shoulders

Do you remember how much people whinged before the video ref, before the bunker?....answer; it was just as much.
NRL fans are just whinging bitches.

 

[T-Boon]

Yep, because broadcasters are just going to stop replaying everything as well....

there should be some agreement between the league and broadcasters in this respect. Like I'd rather watch 30 seconds of ads - seriously - than listen to 30 seconds of whinging about the decision pending.
The broadcasters should be forced to go to 30 seconds worth ads.

 

[OVP]

What the hell is the point if they don't fix up the incompetance in the bunker first? There's still a huge chance teams will still be f**ked over, even with the challenge.

p.s. coaches challenge would be better as they can see everything.

 

[Spade]

I don't know how a captain will rule on a offside decision. Or groundings even, geez we'll see some dud decisions if they go with it. The Knights Dragons game was a poor example, all the try's were so straight forward.

 

[Barkley]

Well done NRL....lets put another band-aid on this problem. Please disregard the core issues which are ambiguous rules, incompetent referees and striving for a perfect ruling on every decision.

If I wanted to watch a perfect sport I would watch athletics, but there is a reason why we only tune in every 4 years to watch it.

 

[Danish]

So basically the NRL has conceded that video refs are getting too many decision wrong, and their solution to this issue is to...... Just limit the amount of decisions they can make?

Surely trying to ensure the "interpretations" used by refs are more in line with the rugby league watching public would be a more successful tactic.

The days of people complaining about the video ref taking too long are over. The big issue now is that the rule book being used by refs seems completely at odds with the one used by the rest of us

 

[Perth Red]

World wide consistent rules for rugby league would be nice!

 

[rockcod]

If they put someone with a brain in the bunker with the power to jump in and overturn any obvious howlers it would be much better.
There is always going to be 50/50 and close calls that get through but I think people accept that, its the massive stuff ups that are the worry. It would be good the refs can just get on with the game the way they see it instead of going to the bunker for everything. Surely the bunker can be in the refs ear to give them a heads up immediately if they see and issue in the lead up to a try.

In the James Roberts situation the ref reckons he didn't see anything so he wouldn't have referred it, but the bunker should tell him they need to check it, not the players.

Half the time the ref sends a decision to the bunker and the players are already walking out to play the ball or handed it over and getting their line set, its just stupid to be going upstairs when the players are basically telling you I got nowhere near it.

The commentators seem to pick up on the bad decisions pretty quick maybe we should give them a big red howler alert button to press.

 

[Frankus]

Write all the refs a prescription for a pair of balls. Maybe then they may make the calls needed on the field.

 

[Bgoodorgoodatit]

Needs to be a coaches challenge if anything.. red button in the box that notifies the referee that there's a challenge on the field. needs to happen within 30 seconds of the decision by the referee to either award or disallow the try in question.

For those of us who have played how the f**k is the captain supposed to make that call in such a short space of time with no video to advise. I like the aspect that it back's the ref to make a decision.

usual reactionary shit though from our esteemed administration. sample size of 1, great idea lets do it...

 

[Valheru]

I like it, as it forces the referee to make a decision and as much crap as we give them, the on field refs are usually right in the first instance. An example of what we won't see now is the Chad Townsend no try last week when every man and his dog knew there was a knock on leading up to it but the ref let play continue to hedge his bets. He called no try as he knew there was a knock on so this will be called immediately. Had he of got tackled and not scored, who knows if the ref lets play continue.

I don't think there should be any more than 1 failed challenge each per half. The average amount fo tries per half in the NRL would have to be around the 4 mark so 2 each is clearly too much and would result in most tries being challenged by the captains.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Needs to be a coaches challenge if anything.. red button in the box that notifies the referee that there's a challenge on the field. needs to happen within 30 seconds of the decision by the referee to either award or disallow the try in question.

For those of us who have played how the f**k is the captain supposed to make that call in such a short space of time with no video to advise. I like the aspect that it back's the ref to make a decision.

usual reactionary shit though from our esteemed administration. sample size of 1, great idea lets do it...

Mate you do realise they've used this system in the Holden Cup for at least the last 2 seasons and it has been the captain's challenge? Been no complaints there that it should be a "Coach's challenge".

Further, if that is the case, why at NRL level is the captain asked what the team is going to do when awarded a penalty, as ultimately it is his decision, yet we see instructions sent out at light speed from the coach via a trainer? I don't hear you, and other complaining about that, and it is exactly the same type of situation.

 

[adamkungl]

So basically the NRL has conceded that video refs are getting too many decision wrong, and their solution to this issue is to...... Just limit the amount of decisions they can make?

The issue isn't about the correctness of the video referee here, it's the idea that the video ref is being way overused, sucking the joy out try scoring. So no, the NRL aren't conceding the above at all.
Secondarily, the harder you strive for perfection ($20 million bunker, slowing every play down to milliseconds) the more glaring every mistake looks - even if the overall number of mistakes has decreased.


I don't think the execution is perfect (i'd prefer coaches challenge, for example) but I'm behind the concept here 100%. I'd also suggest using the video officials in a similar capacity to the touch judge for general play -advise the ref if he sees something, but ref makes the call, and no overturns once the ref has made a call. The Broncos Titans overturns (and then not) were farcically inconsistent.

The "always use the technology available" argument is a slippery one. Under this logic we could slow the game down more and more, way more than now, introduce potential overturns on every play, have 26 refs on the field, one for every player, and still they would make mistakes. Maybe it would be 1 in 1000 wrong, but they'd still be there. And they'd be howlers.
But would 99.99% decision correctness make Rugby League better, at that cost? f**k no.

The gradually increasing usage of the video ref in the last 20 years has not made Rugby League a better game.

 

[TheFrog]

combined with the failure to check Josh Morris’s legitimate touch down

Either it touched the line in which case it was a double movement, or it didn't reach the line in which case it was play the ball where the tackle was originally effected. The ref made a call that it was the latter. It was the better outcome for the Bulldogs anyway as they still had the ball and were still able to attack the line.

Clearly the ref was 100% certain a tackle had been made a metre or so out.

 

[Bgoodorgoodatit]

Mate you do realise they've used this system in the Holden Cup for at least the last 2 seasons and it has been the captain's challenge? Been no complaints there that it should be a "Coach's challenge".

Further, if that is the case, why at NRL level is the captain asked what the team is going to do when awarded a penalty, as ultimately it is his decision, yet we see instructions sent out at light speed from the coach via a trainer? I don't hear you, and other complaining about that, and it is exactly the same type of situation.

Of course I do but the 20's isn't the NRL and they also use the challenge system in the NYC to query non try scoring decisions which I think is a big mistake. There's also no where near as much scrutiny/exposure coupled with the fact that there's more limited use of the video ref in the 20's to begin with. Its hardly the same thing. its no doubt given them some idea as to its implementation however I d like to see some more trials of it in the top grade before jumping in head first.

Furthermore comparing the decision for a captain/coach to take a shot at goal from a penalty to making a decision to challenge a try of which you only get one shot at if you get wrong isn't really a great comparison is it?

 

[Danish]

The issue isn't about the correctness of the video referee here, it's the idea that the video ref is being way overused, sucking the joy out try scoring. So no, the NRL aren't conceding the above at all.
Secondarily, the harder you strive for perfection ($20 million bunker, slowing every play down to milliseconds) the more glaring every mistake looks - even if the overall number of mistakes has decreased.

I don't think the execution is perfect (i'd prefer coaches challenge, for example) but I'm behind the concept here 100%. I'd also suggest using the video officials in a similar capacity to the touch judge for general play -advise the ref if he sees something, but ref makes the call, and no overturns once the ref has made a call. The Broncos Titans overturns (and then not) were farcically inconsistent.

If I were to name the worst decisions of 2016, I reckon the top 10 would all be bad video ref calls. These won't stop under a captains challenge system, and in fact will get worse as getting them wrong will doubly punish a side as they'll have a dodgy try awarded against them AND a challenge lost exposing them to more bad calls later in the half.

I'd rather they focus on refs and video refs actually getting on the same page with the rules so that the absolutely disgraceful decisions stop being made - starting with stopping the constant chopping and changing of the rules and handing over control of the laws of the game to the RLIF - instead of trying to invent a system which tries to shift the blame for those decisions to a captain for not using a challenge or wasting them previously

 

[simmo05]

Heres a simple solution, get rid of the video ref entirely! If a poor decision is made, deal with it! It all evens out in the end. Let the refs do their job.

 

[adamkungl]

If I were to name the worst decisions of 2016, I reckon the top 10 would all be bad video ref calls. These won't stop under a captains challenge system, and in fact will get worse as getting them wrong will doubly punish a side as they'll have a dodgy try awarded against them AND a challenge lost exposing them to more bad calls later in the half.

Maybe, maybe not.

The question has to be asked, why were they bad decisions? I find in most cases with 'howler' video ref decisions, my issue is with the rulebook/latest monthly referee interpretations of the rulebook. The ball-kicking by Konrad Hurrell, as an example. Correct to the letter of the law but utterly ridiculous in practise.

Or they are legitimate 50/50 calls in which for every person outraged there's someone equally stubborn that it was correct, depending on who they were cheering.

Even if the rulebook was cleaned up (and it needs it badly) there would still be mistakes (Strips, obstructions and forward passes will forever be a grey area in Rugby League), and there would still be the issue of ever-increasing time wastage for diminishing returns. And this is the biggest advantage of the challenge idea.

 

[rockcod]

Two things with the video ref that bug me.

One is that they seem to think their job is to disallow tries, an example it the Vunivalu try last week, it was obvious on the first look that is was all above board but they slowed it down and looked about 5 times like they were trying to think up some reason they could knock it back, the bunker could of had that cleared as a try before the ref even referred it if they were watching the game on their giant monitors.

Two is the try/no try ruling before sending it up, all well and good in cases like obstruction if they just want to confirm what they saw but what if they lost sight of a grounding, it is unbelievable to think that if the ref has no idea on the decision that he has to just make up a random opinion which will then be upheld if the bunker cant be sure. What is wrong with try/no try/no idea?

 

[Perth Tiger]

Why not just let the commentators be the video refs.

It doesn't matter what system is in place they will bitch and moan about the decisions all game anyway