Why Can't the Video Ref Rule On a Forward Pass?

[Babyface O'reilly]

I'd be happy to get rid of the video ref off altogether. No one would blame the ref for missing anything that went on in that try. It's the VR stuff ups, in spite of the multi angle coverage they have at their disposal, that p1sses people off.

 

[Grapple]

This applies to any rule, yet forward pass is the only one the video doesn't rule on.



Clearly there is, using last night as an example. The game wouldn't be slowed down more, the try was already looked at about 19 times.

I didn't watch last nights game (obviously!) I guess it comes down to whether or not you think the video ref should have more or less influence in the game or not. I much prefer the old days and simple rugby league.

It seems to me that if the fans, players and everyone else can see it as an "obvious forward pass" means the fault is with the on-field officials not doing a good enough job. Bringing technology in just because we can, doesn't really solve the issue of incompetent officials.

 

[Springs]

They should be able to call it back for blatant offences like last night. Lussick should have been penalised for offside.

What we can't allow is refs going upstairs and saying 'check for a forward pass'.

 

[rabbitohs95]

Kevin Naiqama's pass to Alex McKinnon last Saturday night...that was a shocker...

 

[Tommy Smith]

Video referees are the most incompetent individuals in the world. Even more so than Labor politicians.

So to give them even more power, especially to rule on something as potentially vague as forward passes, is a recipe for disaster.

A big NO from me.

Obviously we were rorted in that instance. But correcting that one obvious bad call won't counter the many f**k-ups allowing video refs to adjudicate on forward passes would create.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Given the changes to the Benefit of the Doubt rule, it's time to look at this again.

Since the ref has already ruled a Try or No Try, 50/50 calls would remain unchanged.

It's an ugly look for the game when a very clear forward pass is replayed time and time again but the referee is forced to rule a Try due to an idiotic rule.

To quote Phil Gould

No No No No No No No No

In fact - get rid of the video ref.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

You know you scored off a forward pass that went to the video too, don't you?

Makes up for the "forward pass" we were pinged for that lead to your first.

 

[ME SO HORNBY!]

If the video ref ruled on forward passes, Cameron Smith would have zero try assists.

 

[Tom Shines]

Lmao

Last night was so bad he should've been penalized for being offside

Video ref should have denied it on that basis alone.

 

[The Engineers Room]

On you other comment about Jennings though. He was pushed by Sandow causing him to make contact with the eels player. No "no try"

Makes no difference if he was pushed, still doesn't give him the right to tackle a defender and the push didn't cause him to collide with the defender he had to reach out to make that contact. NO TRY!

 

[Sir Biffo]

If the video ref ruled on forward passes, Cameron Smith would have zero try assists.

If the video ref ruled on forward passes, Cameron Smith would be working a building site in Logan.

 

[POPEYE]

Time to stop the video ruling on anything except try put-downs . . . and in normal speed

 

[thorson1987]

Time to stop the video ruling on anything except try put-downs . . . and in normal speed

Agreed.

 

[ek999]

Time to stop the video ruling on anything except try put-downs . . . and in normal speed

Disagree. Then we would have every merkin complaining the on field refs are getting the calls wrong and asking why we don't have the video ref adjudicating on the lead up to the try.

 

[Bengal]

It's an ugly look for the game when a very clear forward pass is replayed time and time again but the referee is forced to rule a Try due to an idiotic rule.

Absolutely - if they can do it in a convoluted game like Union then they sure as heck can do it in League. If need be, rulings should be beyond any doubt whatsoever - only the most obvious of obvious of obvious forward passes are ruled upon. Bottom line is we need to get out of this straitjacket the game has created for itself.

 

[Card Shark]

If need be, rulings should be beyond any doubt whatsoever - only the most obvious of obvious of obvious forward passes are ruled upon.

Trouble with that is 1 man will think that was obvious obvious forward but his mate might think it wasn't that obvious at all.

Where does it stop? Can of worms opened up. Something for the Telecrap to write about I suppose.

 

[wibble]

Forward passes should be about the easiest part of the game for technology to pick up.

To humans, who are terrible at judging perspective, forward passes are tough, but a computer program with a data base of how different vectors look from different angles should be able to tell if a pass is forward in close to real time.

We have programs that can land rockets remotely on Mars, and can guide missiles at hundreds of kilometres per hour to intercept other rockets, I'm sure calculating vectors in a small space at low speeds should be pretty easy.

It could even be used in general play, not just for tries. It won't, since no one will care enough to pay for it, but it should be easy, unlike most rules in league that have an element of subjectivity.

In the mean time (in the real world), I can't see why the video ref shouldn't be able to rule on anything that they can obviously see. Of course, we will dispute their judgement (quite rightly from the evidence of past performance), but that is not new.

If we were scared that video refs will make mistakes (and they do) we shouldn't have introduced them, and should get rid of them (as Gould argues). But if we are scared of increasing their powers as we fear they'll make mistakes, the other solution is to get better referees, or have even more of them and have them specialise in different areas.

There could be a referee who studies lots of videos of forward, flat, and backwards passes from lots of angles, and must pass some test on getting them right, and only rules on forward passes. At least every video referee should practice this and pass a test.

I just can't see how forward passes should be so hard to rule on with (ideally) proper technology or (less ideally but more realistically) proper training.

 

[POPEYE]

Disagree. Then we would have every merkin complaining the on field refs are getting the calls wrong and asking why we don't have the video ref adjudicating on the lead up to the try.

Why don't we just replay the whole set of six before a try in super slo-mo, that would do away with a need for 17 players, time off could be a 'stop and revive' for the 13

 

[Stagger Lee]

I just can't see how forward passes should be so hard to rule on with (ideally) proper technology or (less ideally but more realistically) proper training.

FFS - That post is optimism over reality :shock:

Just get rid of the video ref and play the game.

 

[adamkungl]

I didn't watch last nights game (obviously!) I guess it comes down to whether or not you think the video ref should have more or less influence in the game or not. I much prefer the old days and simple rugby league.

The issue for me isn't about more or less influence, but consistency. I've never liked that this is the only thing in the entire rulebook that is treated differently by the video ref.

Reason I bring it up again is that I think the changes to the BOTD ruling could clean it up nicely. We wouldn't see every video decision scrutinising forward passes - it would have to be a blatant, beyond doubt ruling to overturn the on-field ref's decision.

The fact that the referees are incompetent geniuss shouldn't influence the actual rules of the game, imo.