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!

Refereeing Transparency & Consistency

RedV Resurgence

Juniors
Messages
660
Following last nights try/no-try fiasco, we need to look at the refereeing.

When a try is sent to the bunker, the video referee starts watching the replays, however the tv viewer only gets the coverage that the broadcaster chooses to provide. If a decision takes time to be made, the tv viewer gets to see the same views as the bunker referee, however when the bunker makes a quick decision, like last night, you are left wondering which view the bunker used to make a decision.

Watching the try last night, the bunker seemed to make a decision really quickly. By the time the TV broadcast showed the first replay a decision was made to award the try. I was wondering why haven't we see the head on replay and slowed it down to see who's hand was on the ball. I assumed at the time that the referee had watched and fully examined all angles, however as replays for the tv viewer were aired, I started to doubt the decision.

What really struck me was how fast the decision was made. I've watched many times when its was obvious whether a try was scored or not and the bunker continues to watch for other angles and slow motion and zoom in shots. Last night, the decision was made really quickly. Further, I did not see any downward pressure from the Cronulla player, I have doubt that he even touched the ball.

So the question remains, why do we have such varying approaches to determining whether a try has been scored. And the obvious answer is they don't appear to have a systematic approach. If the bunker refs last night did follow a standard approach and they confirmed downward pressure on the ball, then they can never again be bunker refs.

The NRL's policy to minimise the delay in the game by allowing the video ref to start determining the whether a try has been scored should be changed. The people watching it on TV and the crowd via the ground scoreboard should be shown the exact video the ref(s) are watching and allow them to follow the decision making processes. This happens when a video ref takes some time to make a decision and allows the viewers to understand the decision making process.

Another area that has been discussed on this forum, is the '6-again' decision making. I like the rule and we must be continued with. The problem is its not clear why some of the 6-again penalties are given Also, Ref's seem to go through stages in games where they are willing to give out 6-again and at other times of the game they will not award the 6-again. Whilst I like the new rule, consistent application of this rule his quite poor.

Watching the game in its newly sped up format, I feel the on-field referee is now overloaded watching the 10m defensive line; watching the play the ball; foul play; interference in the play the ball; slowing down the play the ball. I think we got rid of the second ref just at the same time as we sped up the game and Ref's are struggling more than ever.
 

TruSaint

Coach
Messages
18,906
The bad calls should not have cost us the game, I agree.

But the OP has a point. The "6 again" rule has become so arbitrary. It's intention was good, however refs can call 6 again whenever they want with no accountability.

We were never anywhere near in the race for the comp, but such calls need clarity. And like @RedV Resurgence said, the Dufty call was so fast, it makes the bunker obsolete.

Im not saying we would have won, in fact we had chances for players like Norman / Hunt and co, to win the game.

But they need to fix the bunker, and give some guidelines for the fans as to the 6 again rule.
 

avocado

Juniors
Messages
1,265
When I’m watching a game, most times 6 again is called I can see why.
Someone put up a graphic a week ago showing we were nowhere near the worst affected by it.
The bunker gets some wrong. Always have, always will.
 

TruSaint

Coach
Messages
18,906
When I’m watching a game, most times 6 again is called I can see why.
Someone put up a graphic a week ago showing we were nowhere near the worst affected by it.
The bunker gets some wrong. Always have, always will.

Fair enough and I think we can all "guess" why the 6 again was called. Its still not clear though and should be clarified. The difference in the play the balls last night was 0.5 seconds between the 2 teams.
As to the bunker, yes they wont get them all correct, but wow that was a quick review last night.
 

Dragon David

Bench
Messages
2,635
Following last nights try/no-try fiasco, we need to look at the refereeing.

When a try is sent to the bunker, the video referee starts watching the replays, however the tv viewer only gets the coverage that the broadcaster chooses to provide. If a decision takes time to be made, the tv viewer gets to see the same views as the bunker referee, however when the bunker makes a quick decision, like last night, you are left wondering which view the bunker used to make a decision.

Watching the try last night, the bunker seemed to make a decision really quickly. By the time the TV broadcast showed the first replay a decision was made to award the try. I was wondering why haven't we see the head on replay and slowed it down to see who's hand was on the ball. I assumed at the time that the referee had watched and fully examined all angles, however as replays for the tv viewer were aired, I started to doubt the decision.

What really struck me was how fast the decision was made. I've watched many times when its was obvious whether a try was scored or not and the bunker continues to watch for other angles and slow motion and zoom in shots. Last night, the decision was made really quickly. Further, I did not see any downward pressure from the Cronulla player, I have doubt that he even touched the ball.


So the question remains, why do we have such varying approaches to determining whether a try has been scored. And the obvious answer is they don't appear to have a systematic approach. If the bunker refs last night did follow a standard approach and they confirmed downward pressure on the ball, then they can never again be bunker refs.

The NRL's policy to minimise the delay in the game by allowing the video ref to start determining the whether a try has been scored should be changed. The people watching it on TV and the crowd via the ground scoreboard should be shown the exact video the ref(s) are watching and allow them to follow the decision making processes. This happens when a video ref takes some time to make a decision and allows the viewers to understand the decision making process.

Another area that has been discussed on this forum, is the '6-again' decision making. I like the rule and we must be continued with. The problem is its not clear why some of the 6-again penalties are given Also, Ref's seem to go through stages in games where they are willing to give out 6-again and at other times of the game they will not award the 6-again. Whilst I like the new rule, consistent application of this rule his quite poor.

Watching the game in its newly sped up format, I feel the on-field referee is now overloaded watching the 10m defensive line; watching the play the ball; foul play; interference in the play the ball; slowing down the play the ball. I think we got rid of the second ref just at the same time as we sped up the game and Ref's are struggling more than ever.

Maybe Annersley needs to investigate and ask the question of the on field refs if the new rule plus all of the other facets of play are too much for one ref to handle. The 6 again rule, if consistently applied, is good for the game but having a pocket ref will also help in the decision of any other issues on the field. The loss of the pocket refs is a money saving thing I know but to me it is at the expense of better on field decisions. Four eyes are better than two even though we still have the sideline guys.

Yes, the bunker did make a quick decision on the Williams try and mistakes will be made. Clark got the bullet as a result.
 

RedVDragon

Juniors
Messages
1,533
Lucky Clark was far away from the dragons faithful. Clark has it in for the dragons hence his quick decision. I wonder if he still owns the PW 50.
 

Attachments

  • 578F0C35-F4D3-4A01-B45C-3FA733263977.jpeg
    578F0C35-F4D3-4A01-B45C-3FA733263977.jpeg
    244.3 KB · Views: 7

muzby

Village Idiot
Staff member
Messages
44,402
Question.

Can you use a captain’s challenge against a bunker decision you don’t agree with?

And if so, how?


Okay, that’s actually two questions. I don’t care. Just answer them.
 

Dragonslayer

First Grade
Messages
7,083
As many have said we had plenty of time to overcome that decision, it didn't happen in the 75th minute, but it could have!.
Top teams find a way to win we just seem to find a way to lose.

As for 6 again, most calls are for 'too long on a tackled player' or 'hand on the ball'. Unfortunately we have some guilty parties that are repeat offenders with this, hemce we get pinged more often.
 

redv13

Juniors
Messages
2,175
Question.

Can you use a captain’s challenge against a bunker decision you don’t agree with?

And if so, how?


Okay, that’s actually two questions. I don’t care. Just answer them.

Can’t use a captain’s challenge for the video ref when it has been referred up by the referee as try/no try. Total crock of $hit that decision and all this bullshit like there was plenty of time left etc... it’s called major momentum swings then all the Sharkies 6 again calls. Pack of bozo’s running the show last night. Then watching the bald headed bozo afterwards!!
 

Gareth67

First Grade
Messages
7,218
If I have said once I have said it a hundred times - eliminate the bunker the game does not need it . It’s fine to say that “ Well they do get most decisions correct , but there is always going to be one that is not - after all they are only human . “ The bunker was introduced for that very reason - to take the human error element out of the equation , however it is still present and always shall be whilst humans are involved.

Get rid of the 2nd referee , the game would run much better with only the one . Of course the major hurdle in this would be the man’s capability - he would need to be on top of his game . This , I believe would also eliminate the unnecessary ‘ player to ref. ‘ chats that occur from time to time , which gives one team an edge over another e.g. C.Ref.Smith .

The worst problem of the bunker itself is that when a mistake is made and it cost a team the match , well they are minus 2 very valuable competition points that no amount of apologizing will ever account for , there gone to Gowings - for good .
 
Last edited:

redv13

Juniors
Messages
2,175
If I have said once I have said it a hundred times - eliminate the bunker the game does not need it . It’s fine to say that “ Well they do get most decisions correct , but there is always going to be one that is not - after all they are only human . “ The bunker was introduced for that very reason - to take the human error element out of the equation , however it is still present and always shall be whilst humans are involved.

Get rid of the 2nd referee , the game would run much better with only the one . Of course the major hurdle in this would be the man’s capability - he would need to be on top of his game . This , I believe would also eliminate the unnecessary ‘ player to ref. ‘ chats that occur from time to time , which gives one team an edge over another e.g. C.Ref.Smith .

The worst problem of the bunker itself is that when a mistake is made and it cost a team the match , well they are minus 2 very valuable compared points that no amount of apologizing will ever account for - there gone to Gowings for good .

The thing is Gareth was that 2 morons were watching, 1 ex referee and 1 ex player and both missed it. Add to the fact that a decision was made in about 30 seconds then the fox commentary ( Ginnane, Roach, Parker ) nailed it within the 1st replay after the try was awarded and all agreed Dufty got their 1st and a howler of decision was made by Clark
 

Dragon David

Bench
Messages
2,635
Hope we don't get Clark again to adjudicate in the bunker. Because of his bad call he got dropped so he would be hating us more now.
 

This Year?

Coach
Messages
18,134
For them to get it so wrong over the last few rounds is alarming. We aren't the only ones who have been affected, but our blunder was the most obvious. Refs cop alot from coaches, players, fans and media and rightly so.
What annoys me more is they slink off and disappear without facing any media after the game unlike coaches and players. All we get is a statement from their boss saying it's wrong. I know it's wrong I was watching the f**king game already. Why can't they be part of the press conference with the coaches and players too?
Officials are ambassadors of the game too and of course they should be respected, but how can you respect someone who doesn't front up? They are under huge amounts of pressure and do an unenviable job, but if I see a human side and if they publicly apologised for a blunder then I'm much less likely to hold a grudge.
We've all made a mistake at work haven't we?
Overall refs have done a great job and have done amazing to adjust to these new rule changes to make our game better to watch.
 
Top