Video Ref

[Macca]

Should there be a limit to the amount of times the Video Ref can look at the replay before making the decision?

During last night's Newwie/Sharks match the video ref looked at a replay 12 times before ruling no try.

Too many? Or is the right decision worth the delay?

Gus Gould on Channel 9's The Roast was adamant that 2 looks is plenty. Easy for him to say, he can look at it 20 times and never have to make a decision that will affect anything. I bet if the video ref had looked at it twice and got it wrong, he'd be jumping up and down saying the video ref's make too many mistakes.

Get it right no matter how long it takes I reckon.

 

[Dr Crane]

If we're going to have a Video Referee, give him time to get it right.

 

[Jobdog]

Agreed 100% on what Gus said this morning. But after the decision has been made, don't allow the station which is covering the game to have replay after replay of the incident.

 

[Voice of Reason]

I am sure that your view has NOTHING to do with ALL the Vidiot decisions last night going in the favour of your team Mac!!! Your argument is flawed because to say "Get it right no matter how long it takes I reckon" implies that the Vidiot MUST be involved in ALL aspects of adjudication in all games. Otherwise what you are sayin is the Vidiot has to get decision correct ONLY for tries. Having said that I think you are close to the answer. Clearly the vidiot has to rule on EVERYTHING and take as much time on ALL contentious decisions or they rule on NOTHING at all- get rid of them. In a situation where we fence sit and select what the vidiot rules upon and how they come to their decisions we have a recipe for disaster and we will have controversy every game. It has to be all or nothing!

 

[Whats Doing]

Either the video can get the decisions 100% right or we get rid of them.

I got no problems with how many times they look at the video as long as they then apply the rules. If it takes 12 times to look at a video, there must be some doubt as to whether a try was scored or not. That is, it is just as likely a try was scored as it was as just as likely as it was not. Therefore the the benefit of the doubt must go to the attacking team.

Also in the Perry no try incident, the video referee looked at the replay overr and over again and it was clear that Kimmorley knocked on, notwithstanding that there was doubt that the try was not scored. However the video ref completely overlooked the knock on and gave the offending team a 20 metre restart.

I could go on but the video ref, with the luxury of having a look at an incident over and over again must apply the laws of the game and get all of the decisions 100% right. This has not happened this year and unless they get their decisions right, get rid of the video ref as many times this year they have got decisions wrong which is unacceptable.

Other sports such as soccer and AFL do not rely on video replays

 

[Alan Shore]

I am sure that your view has NOTHING to do with ALL the Vidiot decisions last night going in the favour of your team Mac!!! Your argument is flawed because to say "Get it right no matter how long it takes I reckon" implies that the Vidiot MUST be involved in ALL aspects of adjudication in all games. Otherwise what you are sayin is the Vidiot has to get decision correct ONLY for tries. Having said that I think you are close to the answer. Clearly the vidiot has to rule on EVERYTHING and take as much time on ALL contentious decisions or they rule on NOTHING at all- get rid of them. In a situation where we fence sit and select what the vidiot rules upon and how they come to their decisions we have a recipe for disaster and we will have controversy every game. It has to be all or nothing!

Hypocrite.

Have a bex and a good lie down.

 

[Voice of Reason]

An obvious intellectual giant is T-heamoriod!! You,ve got nothing.....just like whats in your teams trophy cabinet!!!!

 

[Dr Crane]

Voice of reason indeed.