What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Captain's challenge system

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...-shoulder-charge/story-fnca0von-1226449603458

McGuirk also confirmed the commission had formulated a proposal on the coach's challenge system and it could be rubber-stamped should the rules committee raise no major issues.

The idea will be to trial it later this year in the Toyota Cup and provided it comes through without any major hitches, it could be introduced to the NRL as early as next year.

"We have a proposal on the coach's challenge system that's going to be discussed," McGuirk said. "We're going to get the thoughts of the coaches and members of the committee.

"Once we have the model finalised we will take a look at trialling it in Toyota Cup matches.

"We will look at how it goes in the trials and go from there."
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,264
No,No,No!

There's enough delays and BS in a game around the ref's decisions at the moment as it is, we don't need more spotlights cast on them.

Only way this would be a ghood thing is if you get rid of the video ref altogether and just have the coaches challenge, then I could live with it.
 

Dogs Of War

Coach
Messages
12,721
No,No,No!

There's enough delays and BS in a game around the ref's decisions at the moment as it is, we don't need more spotlights cast on them.

Only way this would be a ghood thing is if you get rid of the video ref altogether and just have the coaches challenge, then I could live with it.

I would think that is the whole point behind it. Take the focus off refs and put the onus on coaches to challenge what they feel is incorrect. If anything I think it would improve how refs controlled a game, as they would go back to calling a game the way they saw it.

That said, let's see how the results of the trial in Toyota Cup go first. It could show up some major issues with it, especially interested in seeing how coaches use challenges in the last few minutes of games to delay proceedings when the game is on the line.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,264
I see no advantage to the viewers of the game. You know the customers, the people who are paying to watch it! I think sometimes the game forgets that it is in the entertainment business.
 

Walt Flanigan

Referee
Messages
20,727
Well I'd assume that coaches would only have a limited amount of challenges and this would probably cut down on the amount of decisions going to the video ref. It also take a bit of the onus of the Refs.

I haven't got an issue with it. Something has to be done because it's just a shambles at the moment.
 

Pierced Soul

First Grade
Messages
9,202
agreed something needs to be done, however i'd be interested in what can be challenged. say origin 1, stuart didnt like the inglis "try", it already went to the video ref, if he wants to challenge it who looks at it - the "bunker" they were going to do?

how far back can you go? bulldogs first try against the broncos came after they got a penalty when reed was pushed into the bulldogs player playing the ball by another dog, could griffin wait till the dogs scored before deciding to challenge it?

after every decision do we need to wait 10secs to see if the other side will "challenge"? prefer captains challenge as the players are out on the field and see the stuff first hand
 

carlosthedwarf

First Grade
Messages
8,189
I'd presume you can only challenge a few things, missed knock ons, offsides etc. Forward pass and obstruction would be difficult to challenge.

I doubt it could be used to overturn a bad video ref decision. Or anything that is judgement

Give them 2 challenges a game, if they have two successful they get a third.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,264
It'll end in more whinging, more delays to games, more arguing by commentators. I can see no benefits what so ever other than to appease egotistical coaches who think they know more about what's going on on the field than the refs.
 

clarency

Juniors
Messages
1,217
This is the greatest idea ever... Which I've been calling for, for 2 years now :-D

It should accompany removing the video ref from the on field referee. The referee makes the call as he sees it, if the coach doesn't like it. He challenges. It is a very simple system that has been used in quite a few sports now.

You get 3 failed attempts. That is, if your challenge is unsuccessful, your remaining challenges goes down to two. If it is successful it remains at 3.

This system would stop people whinging over referee decisions as it spreads onus to the coaches, and will make the game go faster by reducing the amout of time we sit there watching the big screen.
 

ek999

First Grade
Messages
6,977
I'd presume you can only challenge a few things, missed knock ons, offsides etc. Forward pass and obstruction would be difficult to challenge.

I doubt it could be used to overturn a bad video ref decision. Or anything that is judgement

Give them 2 challenges a game, if they have two successful they get a third.

You would do the same for Cricket and Tennis by having a number of unsuccessful challenges. If you correctly challenge a decision, why would you lose a challenge if you were right and the ref's were wrong?

I would also make it a captain's challenge and not a coaches challenge because I don't think the coach should have that much influence on the game. Give them 20 or 30 seconds to challenge a call without getting any replays or anything.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
No,No,No!

There's enough delays and BS in a game around the ref's decisions at the moment as it is, we don't need more spotlights cast on them.

Only way this would be a ghood thing is if you get rid of the video ref altogether and just have the coaches challenge, then I could live with it.

I see no advantage to the viewers of the game. You know the customers, the people who are paying to watch it! I think sometimes the game forgets that it is in the entertainment business.

It'll end in more whinging, more delays to games, more arguing by commentators. I can see no benefits what so ever other than to appease egotistical coaches who think they know more about what's going on on the field than the refs.
so like every post you make?
 

gUt

Coach
Messages
16,935
Coach has 2 challenges left up his sleeve with 2 minutes to go. His team holds a slender lead but is being smashed physically and are desperately defending their own line. They need a break.

What happens next?

Defender tackles someone - CHALLENGE THAT CALL! - Video ref looks at it... um nothing wrong with that call x 2
 

Dogs Of War

Coach
Messages
12,721
agreed something needs to be done, however i'd be interested in what can be challenged. say origin 1, stuart didnt like the inglis "try", it already went to the video ref, if he wants to challenge it who looks at it - the "bunker" they were going to do?

The ref would have had to have made a decision. What if he thought that Inglis had knocked it on. It would then have been up to QLD to challenge it. A cursory glace from QLD may have suggested it wasn't worth using there challenge on. Then we get a whole new ball game. It's adding another element to the game rather than relying on the ref to order a video ref review. The best part is that ref's call would be removed, as he has already made his decision. Video ref can't make a decision from the video review. Well the call on the field stands.

how far back can you go? bulldogs first try against the broncos came after they got a penalty when reed was pushed into the bulldogs player playing the ball by another dog, could griffin wait till the dogs scored before deciding to challenge it?

And this is what a trial is about. Working out the kinks for a system to operate successfully. Personally I think you should have hard and fast rules like the NFL that you can only go back to the previous tackle.

after every decision do we need to wait 10secs to see if the other side will "challenge"? prefer captains challenge as the players are out on the field and see the stuff first hand

A coach may decide that the captain is the best person to call it. It wouldn't take long for a hand signal or something is employed by a team to work out if they should challenge or not. Really any coaches challenge would require the co-operation of the players as well.

The things that really need to be thought of is where you can use a challenge.

In general play it could really slow the game, though limiting the number is fine in theory, but in practice if a coach gets on a roll (and the ref is having a bad day), we could see 5-6 challenges in general play per half. Do we want that?

Last 2 minutes of a half, the NFL employs a system where you can't challenge anymore and it's automatically reviewed to remove that element of doubt in a game. I think the NRL would want to employ something similar to ensure that any last minute game winners were reviewed in case one of the coaches had run out of challenges and the ref decided at that moment to make a clanger of a decision. Though I would limit that to scoring plays only.

I hope the NRL is also looking at employing things such as automatic time off for scrums and out of bounds balls. It's so silly watching players rush to pack a scrum to get time off, while the other team walks over there, probably having a laugh as the opposition has to hold that formation. Plus it means more play on the field.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,695
It is Good to see that the ARLC is thinking about the future, as people have said the only way this will work is if the VR is given the flick

I would give two challenges per coach, per match if a challenge is unsuccesful you lose it

This will put the Onus back onto the Refs, to make decisions, rather than rely on the VR
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,787
This system would stop people whinging over referee decisions as it spreads onus to the coaches, and will make the game go faster by reducing the amout of time we sit there watching the big screen.

Your not going to reduce any whinging if it all still boils down to a decision made by a video ref. I mean it will be basically the same scenario we now have with the only change being the coach being able to intiate a video ref review.

Im not sure how it will make the game "go faster" due people not watching the big screen, surely it will slow the game down due to more stoppages?

Im still amazed that there is a feeling around that people will simply "accept" an on-field refs decision, if they get rid of the Video Ref. Have you read any gamethreads on here in the last 10 years???
 
Messages
1,695
The ref would have had to have made a decision. What if he thought that Inglis had knocked it on. It would then have been up to QLD to challenge it. A cursory glace from QLD may have suggested it wasn't worth using there challenge on. Then we get a whole new ball game. It's adding another element to the game rather than relying on the ref to order a video ref review. The best part is that ref's call would be removed, as he has already made his decision. Video ref can't make a decision from the video review. Well the call on the field stands.



And this is what a trial is about. Working out the kinks for a system to operate successfully. Personally I think you should have hard and fast rules like the NFL that you can only go back to the previous tackle.



A coach may decide that the captain is the best person to call it. It wouldn't take long for a hand signal or something is employed by a team to work out if they should challenge or not. Really any coaches challenge would require the co-operation of the players as well.

The things that really need to be thought of is where you can use a challenge.

In general play it could really slow the game, though limiting the number is fine in theory, but in practice if a coach gets on a roll (and the ref is having a bad day), we could see 5-6 challenges in general play per half. Do we want that?

Last 2 minutes of a half, the NFL employs a system where you can't challenge anymore and it's automatically reviewed to remove that element of doubt in a game. I think the NRL would want to employ something similar to ensure that any last minute game winners were reviewed in case one of the coaches had run out of challenges and the ref decided at that moment to make a clanger of a decision. Though I would limit that to scoring plays only.

I hope the NRL is also looking at employing things such as automatic time off for scrums and out of bounds balls. It's so silly watching players rush to pack a scrum to get time off, while the other team walks over there, probably having a laugh as the opposition has to hold that formation. Plus it means more play on the field.


I agree with this, as Gus Gould has been saying, call time off in the last 5 Minutes of each Half when the Ball goes dead
 

clarency

Juniors
Messages
1,217
It will if the coach has power to make a difference, ie. if the ref makes a decision and the coach choses not to challenge the decision. They are hardly going to later complain about it, due to the fact that they can act on it then and there.

If challenges are impemented AND the video ref is removed from the onfield referees power it will be faster. Currently the ref goes to VR over the smallest concerns, but the coaches can't risk doing that because they have a limit on their use. Ergo... we will see less use of the video ref.

People don't need to accept decisions that get made by on-field referees, they aren't controlling the game. Doing so would be ridiculous considering they all (you and I included) wear our *insert whatever team you go for* goggles when we watch every second of the match.
 

Kiwi

First Grade
Messages
9,471
what will they be able to challenge? Alot of the time the try is fine, it's the wrong call 4 plays earlier that lead up to the try could be the problem.
 

jimmythehand

Juniors
Messages
2,071
this is a great idea, but of course there are obstacles, hurdles, issues, and no one system is going to be perfect.

If they get it right, then the best thing is that 'howlers' will be removed from the game, and let's face it PERTH_RED, you ask just about any fan what the worst part of the NRL is at the moment and they'll say the bad refereeing decisions. Can't quite see how you can't see 'any advantage for the viewers of the game.'. In fact it's quite a ridiculous comment. I've seen comments on foxsports like 'congratulations nrl, you've lost another fan' because of the poor performance by the referees.

One of the concerns being raised are when challenges are made, how far you go back etc. My feeling is that if a challenge is made during play, where there would otherwise be no break in play, you might need to keep going until the set of 6 is ended or tackle count restarted. Then the video ref would look at the non-decision. This would help alleviate teams making challenges just to stop the play and get a break.

I also can't see how the increase in interruptions to the game are going to cause a major problem. If you've only got 2 challenges a half, then you're really only going to want to use them for howlers. Just like in cricket, players will find out if they challenge 50/50 calls they're going to lose challenges, and then when they really need one, there won't be any left. There's also the idea of losing an interchange for an incorrect challenge.
 

jimmythehand

Juniors
Messages
2,071
The things that really need to be thought of is where you can use a challenge.

In general play it could really slow the game, though limiting the number is fine in theory, but in practice if a coach gets on a roll (and the ref is having a bad day), we could see 5-6 challenges in general play per half. Do we want that?

Why would we not want that? We want players deciding the outcome of games, not referees. If a referee makes 100 wrong decisions in a game I'd be happy to see them all reviewed.
 

Latest posts

Top