The Bunker

[Vic Mackey]

the problem is that the refs didn't seem to know the rules

According to the courier mail (i know ... but) in that situation it should not have been a drop out, but a turnover, giving the Tigers the ball back

Apparently it's been confirmed to the Tigers it should have been their ball.

 

[WaznTheGreat]

The bunker is such a sexual deviant sounding thing

 

[McLovin]

The bunker is such a sexual deviant sounding thing

Dunno.. Whenever I hear it I think they're based on a beach in German occupied France...

 

[Bretto]

http://www.nrl.com/how-good-is-roger-tuivasa-sheck/tabid/11387/newsid/75375/default.aspx

Watch the video at 1:15.

Perfect. Ball was grounded. Dropout.

 

[Unscrupulous]

Perfect. Ball was grounded. Dropout.

Yeah except it's not, hence the rule change.

 

[snickers007]

the problem is that the refs didn't seem to know the rules

According to the courier mail (i know ... but) in that situation it should not have been a drop out, but a turnover, giving the Tigers the ball back

It was a mutual infringement, which is basically a catch-all for when something weird happens, such as the ball bursting, the referee blowing his whistle accidentally, a dog running on the field and tripping someone etc.

If something weird happens, and it irregularly impacts the game, it is pulled up, and scrum is awarded at the point of the infringement, with the loose and feed going to the attacking team (territorial position). Unlike other scrum infringements (knock on, forward pass etc) this one does not turn into a changeover after the 5th play the ball.

So Newcastle scrum 25m out.

Tony Archer has confirmed that this could have been an option - but has put the caveat in, that the referee is the sole judge as to whether the game has been impacted. So essentially, the referee either didn't think the game was impacted, or he didn't know the rule.

 

[El Diablo]

3 wrongs calls so far tonight

did it come with a warranty?

 

[GongPanther]

The Bunker so so much of a busted arse,even Kevin Procter dare not go near it.:shock:

 

[Johnny88]

Bunker is shit.

 

[Danish]

Someone might be a be able to confirm, but I thought one of the primary function of the bunker was supposed to be the same people making decisions each game leading to consistency.

That being the case, why do we still just have a different video ref assigned to every game?

Most of the problem with the bunker are caused by the underlying way in which referees are coached to make decisions, so they are actually doing s perfect job based on the rules they are given to make decisions, but those rules are just plain wrong. Until the base rules a guidelines for refs are overhauled there will be no change.

 

[POPEYE]

The bunker is a boys' club when it should be an engine room, there should always be the one Scotty in charge with qualified engineers under his command . . . otherwise every beam up will be a f**k up

 

[Glenn]

Maybe they need a Bunker to review the Bunker decisions

 

[ouwet]

3 wrongs calls so far tonight

did it come with a warranty?

Three wrong calls? You saying the Shepard was incorrect?

You cannot run or go behind your own player and impede the defender in anyway. The defender for a split second would've lost sight of the attacker, whether he made the wrong call or got turned inside out is irrelevant. FMD Phil Gould speaks BS and people always go with him.

 

[Pierced Soul]

that shepard from semi was one of the "purest" shepards i've seen in years. thats said the bunker got several other calls wrong. the first 2 weeks of the bunker i thought it was the best innovation sice we removed the corner posts from play, but it seems to be getting worse and worse.

i dont even understand how it could be deteriorating so quickly after the first few rounds were almost perfect.

it also seems that they're making up procedures on the run, sometimes they intervene in general play, sometimes they dont. no one knows whetehr they will or wont, or whetehr they should. refs use the bunker for forward passes, the bunker apparently cant tell whether someone is onside when everyone else can....

rabble rabble rabble

 

[Walt Flanigan]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the bunker concept, just the people running the show.

 

[cleary89]

Yeh whats wrong with the bunker? Why would you want to go back to the old video ref relying on the channel 9 feed?

 

[Sean7]

Sick of hearing Johns crapping on about how the refs shouldn't have to rule try or no try. The problem isn't that the refs are ruling try or no try, it's that the bunker is not overturning decisions when there is enough evidence to do so.

We need to have the refs make a call on field because the bunker may not have a clearer angle.

It seems Johns would rather have the refs and bunker both say they don't know and then just stare blankly at each other for a few minutes and then resort to a coin toss. How does he thinks refs were awarding tries before we had a video ref or bunker? They made a decision on field just as they do now. The bunker is just double checking.

 

[big hit!]

Sick of hearing Johns crapping on about how the refs shouldn't have to rule try or no try. The problem isn't that the refs are ruling try or no try, it's that the bunker is not overturning decisions when there is enough evidence to do so.

We need to have the refs make a call on field because the bunker may not have a clearer angle.

It seems Johns would rather have the refs and bunker both say they don't know and then just stare blankly at each other for a few minutes and then resort to a coin toss. How does he thinks refs were awarding tries before we had a video ref or bunker? They made a decision on field just as they do now. The bunker is just double checking.

i agree that Johns harping on about it is tiresome, but Gould has valid points with regard to the bunker and video decisions.

Offsides from kicks and obstructions and most of the shit that goes on in general play on a try scoring play should not be reviewed. the officials (including line officials) on the field are in a better position to determine all of this and should be empowered to make the decision.

the only thing that has to be looked on review is grounding of the ball and perhaps whether it has been touched by a player in the air or something.

the ridiculousness of going back through a play and checking every single thing in the lead-up to the try is just that - ridiculous. the on-field officials make immediate decisions on every other play. if there is an infringement in the lead-up to a try, the ref should pull it up when it happens, rather than allowing play to continue with a whole heap of doubt and then wasting countless minutes each game going through the footage.

 

[DiegoNT]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the bunker concept, just the people running the show.

So much this! The problems with the old video ref system wasn't that the technology wasn't there (although it always helps to be upto date with current technology), the problem was that refs were coming up with bizarre decisions that go against what everyone else see. Improving the technology is useless if you still have the same monkeys coming up with bizarre decisions. The problem with video refs and refs in general is that they are over coached. It's similar to a player being so overcoacged that he can no longer see the simple opportunities in front of him. Where a fan/player/coach/media can see a simple knock on the thougt process of a ref is ' is their separation, did he play at it, what angle did it come out, did a defender contribute to it coming out, if a defender did contribute did he play at it or was it accident, blah blah blah solve for X' refs are looking for 'indicators' and over thinking every decision. The only coaching a ref should get is fitness training to ensure he can keep up with the game and that's it. Coaching refs to look for indicators, to have tip sheets for teams and players, to have complicated formulas to work out decisions for simple knock ons and obstruction plays is what is seeing the standards of reffing drop dramatically

 

[El Diablo]

Three wrong calls? You saying the Shepard was incorrect?

yes

You cannot run or go behind your own player and impede the defender in anyway. The defender for a split second would've lost sight of the attacker, whether he made the wrong call or got turned inside out is irrelevant. FMD Phil Gould speaks BS and people always go with him.

he didn't impede anyone

Brett Stewart did it when they reviewed the Lusick no try and the bunker gave no penalty