The Put Down Rule Needs To Be Fixed

[Earl]

The rule needs to be fixed. Its embarassing to see so many players losing the ball over the line, yet being award tries.

Are the Video Referees getting it wrong?

No, because they are trying to act 'consistantly' but the problem is the have made it an absolute mess for themselves.

Time to go back to square one with this rule.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I'm yet to see a try given that shouldn't have been so I don't know what the problem is. There have been a few 50-50 ones but nothing blatantly wrong.

 

[Rod]

100% agree. Ash Graham's try the other night was an embarrasment. I really don't think Inu's first try yesterday was a try either.

 

[coolumsharkie]

They were all bad, how hard is it to rule on downward pressure? Only the NRL could c**k this up.

 

[Mr Saab]

I'm yet to see a try given that shouldn't have been so I don't know what the problem is. There have been a few 50-50 ones but nothing blatantly wrong.

What the?
Inu dropped the ball over the line! Ray Charles could have even seen that and he is dead and blind!

 

[Earl]

Ash Grahams is the one I'm refering too. He clearly dropped the ball imo, but because of a blurry slow motion replay he 'may' have gotten a finger too it.

The rule is a joke atm, and the video referees are on a hiding to nothing.

If they award these as tries, they get condemed, but if someone starts ruling them as no try's they'll be deemed as 'inconsistant'

 

[Canard]

Everytime there is grey people want the rules changed or clarified.

This isn't going to stop officials "interpretation" of said rules however.

 

[sharknows]

Couldn't agree more. There needs to be downward pressure & control. A little finger brushing past the ball really should't be enough!

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

I'm yet to see a try given that shouldn't have been so I don't know what the problem is. There have been a few 50-50 ones but nothing blatantly wrong.

Ben Barba & Mark Gasnier immediately come to mind

 

[Frailty]

Two options:

- Use ultra slow motion HD cameras in the in goal areas to stop the 'blurring' and allow a clearer picture. Only problem is that it still allows for mentally challenged video referees to still get a decision wrong.

- Remove the Video Referee altogether and replace with in goal judges. May lead to some incorrect decisions, but these are forgivable in my opinion when they are judged at normal speeds. However, I also believe it will result in more 'common sense' decisions.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

If a player gets a finger on the ball it's a try. That's all that is needed and that's all it should be. You can't possibly suggest the referees now have to judge how much pressure a player got on the ball. Next people will want a f**king pressure sensor in the ball to determine how hard the player forced it. Get real. If there's contact with the player, ball and ground it's a try. Even if that contact is minimal in every case. Minimal is fine. This issue only exists because a million cameras and frame by frame makes it look like perfectly good tries that would have been given every time over the past 100 years might be doubtful. If a ref still f**ks it up it doesn't mean the rule is wrong. It means the ref f**ked up. It happens. Get over it.

 

[Mr Saab]

It should not happen ECT...not with a video ref!
Even in live speed the Inu try was not a try.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

So what the f**k has that got to do with the rule?

 

[Pistol_Pete]

What about the easts try last week ? An absolute joke it was awarded. The bloke dropped it and dropped it cold but because it hit his thigh on the way down the inbred tools in the video referee box rule it a `kick' and play on. How long before we see a pass from dummy half, a glancing header from first receiver and someone glancing the ball with a fingernail awarded a try ? We all know what a try looks like and there are too many now that look nothing like tries being awarded because Harrigan, like every cop, fancies himself a lawyer, when in truth, like every cop, he's one wrung up from the intellect of a mall cop on a segway

 

[Stagger Lee]

And this is the reason we should get rid of the video ref

At least with a ref making a 'live' decision if he stuffs up then we can generally accept it because his line of sight may be obstructed or such but what is the point in slowing down our great game to have a video ref get it wrong?

 

[DC_fan]

The word CONTROL has to come in to play

 

[Valheru]

- Remove the Video Referee altogether and replace with in goal judges. May lead to some incorrect decisions, but these are forgivable in my opinion when they are judged at normal speeds. However, I also believe it will result in more 'common sense' decisions.

I agree with this but it will never happen. The 1st time a ref gets it wrong there will be calls from all corners to have the video ref back. The answer to this is to not hire decrepit morons and to adjudicate on commons sense.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

The most ridiculous thing about these whinges is that people seem to be okay that mistakes are made, no matter how many mistakes there are, as long as they are made by the ref or touchies or in-goal judges. And as such people are willing to get rid of the video ref - not to ensure less mistakes are made, but so that the mistakes are made in real time instead of on replay. This would of course actually lead to more mistakes, human ones, but more. The logic of this idea beggars belief.

 

[Packy]

The Inu try was only wrong in the fact that it was awarded to Inu instead of Halatau. The ball was knocked out by the Storm player, if the Storm player doesn't play at the ball Inu holds it and is held up in goal or scores the try.

Mark O'Meley scored a ridiculous one a few years ago playing for the Roosters against the Dogs but by the rules it's a try.

 

[JoeD]

The word CONTROL has to come in to play

Control will create much more issues. Imagine the ball is stopped in the in goal. Does an attacker have to pick the ball up and then force it to score a try?