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!

Referee accountability

Kilkenny

Coach
Messages
14,211
Can I firstly say the Roosters were the better side this evening and the incorrect no try decision against us in respect of the DWZ try had no bearing on the outcome of the game.

However, it does highlight the fact the NRL needs to urgently change the situation where the on field referees are making a call without having any idea whether it is a try or no try. Please change the current ruling so the on field referee is not forced to make a call where he has no idea. Allow him to simply say I dont know and let the video referee decide. The situation of conclusive evidence one way or the other simply isn't working as we saw this evening.
 

God-King Dean

Immortal
Messages
46,614
I don't really have a problem with the onfield ref saying Try or No Try.

It main flaw however, is that most video refs are too pussy to overrule them.
 

insert.pause

First Grade
Messages
6,654
Are you a video ref?

Both the refs and the commentators thought he lost it in normal speed, wasn't conclusive that he didn't lose it. That's the way the current system works, that's not the refs fault.

They have to get rid of the on field ref forced to make a call and the video ref forced to prove him conclusively wrong, it's ridiculous that a ref could be 20m away from the ball with their view obstructed by a dozen players and forced to make a call on whether it's a try or not. While benefit of the doubt was a cop out I think people were more accepting of it and probably simplified it more than it currently is.
 

Kilkenny

Coach
Messages
14,211
Both the refs and the commentators thought he lost it in normal speed, wasn't conclusive that he didn't lose it. That's the way the current system works, that's not the refs fault.

They have to get rid of the on field ref forced to make a call and the video ref forced to prove him conclusively wrong, it's ridiculous that a ref could be 20m away from the ball with their view obstructed by a dozen players and forced to make a call on whether it's a try or not. While benefit of the doubt was a cop out I think people were more accepting of it and probably simplified it more than it currently is.

The on field referee who ruled 'no try' in reality had no idea. It was pure guess work and in normal speed in his position I can understand he really had no idea. So why do we have this ridiculous situation where they have to make a call when in reality they have no idea and are guessing. Just send it upstairs and let the video referee decide. Maybe in this situation they will get it right 50% of the time instead of 25% of the time.
 

Parraren

Bench
Messages
4,100
luke-patten-salford.jpg
 

adamkungl

Immortal
Messages
42,972
Firstly, I'm happy we got a win up but f**king hell rubbish like this puts a downer on the whole game. My anger here is as a fan of Rugby League rather than the Roosters. So, with that in mind excuse my rant..

Every man and his dog can see that it was a try, a spectacular one at that.
It's understandable that the ref and touchy sent it upstairs as a no try.

But for the video ref to watch it that many times and get it completely and utterly wrong is ridiculous. There was zero doubt he got it down clean. Zero.

The NRL with Greenberg running the football department has now created an environment where referees can not be criticised by coaches. I hope Cleary brought his chequebook to the presser because not only does the video ref deserve a public blasting, he possibly deserves to be stoned and/or put to death by firing squad.

Seriously though, whoever it was should not be employed as a referee tomorrow.

The video refs are dragging down NRL ref standards 1) by removing any responsibility for the 4 (or is it 6.. or 12?) on field officials to make a call, and 2) STILL GETTING IT WRONG. It's a coin toss. No matter how obvious the decision may seem, there's still a chance of the red light coming up.

Maybe change the colour of the video refs shirt too you incompetent dickhead Greenberg... :crazy:

/rant
 

Cockadoodledoo

First Grade
Messages
5,045
Adam you are right and the system in place does nothing to improve the standard of refereeing. In fact it does more to indicate that they either have given up or believe they don't have a problem at all. To make matters worse is this ridiculous rule that the onfield referee has to make a decision before sending it upstairs. Let's be honest, in a lot of cases like tonight, they are simply guessing and that guess is often what leads to the eventual outcome. I have no doubt if Sutton indicated try for DWZ then the outcome would have been a try from the video ref. Stop the guessing, allow the ref to just admit they are not sure and let the video ref make a decision. In a situation where the video ref's view is obscured then let the onfield ref make the call. Common sense please NRL.
 

mxlegend99

Referee
Messages
23,655
DWZ lost it, you can tell without slowing it down to a blurry frame by frame view.
There's no separation at all as he grounds it. That's a clear try.

This new system is a huge step backwards fromthe old system. Why have the onfield referee guess and then have that guess hold more weight then 20,000 replays from multiple angles?

3 blatantly wrong video referee decisions in one weekend. Tge Eels try off a cleay Ma'u knock on, the Gagai try off a clear Sims knock on, and now the Panthers no try despite every frame from every angle showing no separation and a clean grounding over the try line.

This is better then BOTD how?
 
Last edited:

blaza88z

Coach
Messages
15,225
The problem with it is that they try to methodically adjudicate on every play with a set of guidelines, similar to cricket with the hawkeye LBW process but the difference is that there's so many variables that can occur in the NRL that pretty much make it near impossible to apply any sort of guidelines to a decision, ever since they introduced the video ref into Rugby League there's been 2 constant issues (obstruction and grounding of the ball).

They've gone from separation, to control and they still f**k it up. I also think they need to f**k off this super slow motion camera with a poor quality fuzziness about it, if you try to convince yourself he lost control by slowing it down so much then eventually you'll convince yourself.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
36,938
There's no separation at all as he grounds it. That's a clear try.

This new system is a huge step backwards fromthe old system. Why have the onfield referee guess and then have that guess hold more weight then 20,000 replays from multiple angles?

3 blatantly wrong video referee decisions in one weekend. Tge Eels try off a cleay Ma'u knock on, the Gagai try off a clear Sims knock on, and now the Panthers no try despite every frame from every angle showing no separation and a clean grounding over the try line.

This is better then BOTD how?

To me its not the rule though, its bad video referring.

All those cases were clear, and there was either evidence to overturn or not overturn.

That's the issue.

Change the rules and you still have the same issue.
 

Pierced Soul

First Grade
Messages
9,202
Change the rules and you still have the same issue.

to an extent..... the whole "overturning" is as much of the problem as anything. if that try was sent upstairs to be looked at just to check grounding, the video ref (who should never be in the box again) can look at it for what it is, rather than trying to find evidence or whatever the f**k it is they're supposedly looking for.

there's been things which dont look like tries but cos the video ref cant "prove" it, they go with the "guess" that the onfield ref made.

but when numpties sit in the box, watch things 10 times and still get it wrong there''s a very broken system or total spastics in the box randomly pushing buttons

lol@ dave taylor being placed on report for a tackle he didnt make
 

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
12,075
What is all the fuss about?
The rule is not 'no separation', it is whether the player has full control. The ball is clearly coming out of Zelezniaks hand. It has slipped out of his palm and while still touching his fingers, is not in control (by current rules). Whinge about changing the rules, but the video ref got that right.

Some of you guys are as cross eyed as Patten (or maybe as thick as him??)


Having said that, the video refs have shockers. Mainly the obstruction rule though....
 

benntash

Juniors
Messages
331
What is all the fuss about?
The rule is not 'no separation', it is whether the player has full control. The ball is clearly coming out of Zelezniaks hand. It has slipped out of his palm and while still touching his fingers, is not in control (by current rules). Whinge about changing the rules, but the video ref got that right.

Some of you guys are as cross eyed as Patten (or maybe as thick as him??)


Having said that, the video refs have shockers. Mainly the obstruction rule though....
Your saying he had no control, so how does grounding the ball with your chest or forearm work? Where's the control in that?
 

benntash

Juniors
Messages
331
The whole situation with the try / no try ruling by the onfield official is just unprofessional IMO when they are clearly guessing most of the time. Why not just just send it upstairs to the video official without a try or no try ruling, if it's inconclusive make it a refs call.
 

Rebel

First Grade
Messages
5,360
Get rid of the try/no try thing and go back to benefit of the doubt.

DWZ scored that try and it would have been awarded with BOD. Just like how the Manu Mau knock on and Reece Robinson foot in touch tries, would not have been awarded.

Much better system.
 

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
12,075
Your saying he had no control, so how does grounding the ball with your chest or forearm work? Where's the control in that?

Ball on ground. Downward pressure. No control required if you havent yet had it. You havent had control, and then lost it.

Not my rule, dont blame me!!
 

yobbo84

Coach
Messages
12,779
The absolute blatant errors made by the video referees this round (and the subsequent agreement on these wrong calls by the refs' boss) show that the system is very broken. Coaches have every right to complain when they are losing matches by incompetence.

It all started with Robert Finch/Bill Harrigan and gone worse from there. Calling players by their first name, "game management" rather than officiating the rules, warning players instead of penalising, etc etc.

But that's not the worst part - the single greatest issue with referees is the fact that they "study" up on teams and players before matches. They receive tip sheets on players; they go into a match thinking, for example, "I have to watch JWH, he tends to go on with the tackle too much". So they go into a match looking for these specific things to penalise - it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. How many times do you hear the ref yell to a player - "play it with your foot, [name]!". They're looking specifically for that player and not at others.

Refs are human - they are being filled up with too much information pre-game. Simplify their preparation and let them just officiate what is happening on the field.

So here it is, yobbo84's 5 keys to improving refereeing:

1. Refer to players by team/number only. No first names.
2. No tip sheets. Ref what you see on the field.
3. No "game management". Don't coach the players. If they infringe, penalise.
4. There should be two video referees:
- One to watch the game and provide backup as they do now (e.g. player X got tackled late there ref).
- One to adjudicate on tries. This person should NOT be watching the game. They shouldn't let the current game situation pressure their decision. When a decision gets sent up stairs they see the required vision and only that required vision.
5. Don't hire idiots.

Rant over.
 
Top