KiamaSaint
Coach
- Messages
- 17,485
I was watching Tomic play tennis tonight, tennis is a boring game to watch, but the one thing they have right is the referral system, mainly because hawk eye can resolve an issue in 10 seconds rather than the 3-5 minutes it takes the video refs in league decide.
Time is a big issue but it is interesting that in both tennis and cricket it is a referral system, albeit that many of the cricket commentators want to take the power away from the players to refer.
I wonder if the referral system would work in league. The referee makes an on field call and the Captains of both teams have one referral per half. A player generally knows whether he has scored or not as do the tacklers so they would only refer if they thought there was a high probability that the challenge would be successful. If successful the Captain would retain his power to refer. If the decision is inconclusive it would go back to the referee's original call, taking away BOTD (although this has now gone anyway).
The NFL have a similar system and it seems to work for them. Worth exploring in a trial match surely?
Time is a big issue but it is interesting that in both tennis and cricket it is a referral system, albeit that many of the cricket commentators want to take the power away from the players to refer.
I wonder if the referral system would work in league. The referee makes an on field call and the Captains of both teams have one referral per half. A player generally knows whether he has scored or not as do the tacklers so they would only refer if they thought there was a high probability that the challenge would be successful. If successful the Captain would retain his power to refer. If the decision is inconclusive it would go back to the referee's original call, taking away BOTD (although this has now gone anyway).
The NFL have a similar system and it seems to work for them. Worth exploring in a trial match surely?