weev
Bencher
But what if at the press conference a coach admitted his side got a break...
'... yer, that penally in the front of their sticks gifted us the game. There was nothing in it, Fred was falling into the tackle and he only copped a tap on the chin. He was surprised to hear the whistle too. Not a high shot in my books, Thank you ref...'
But no, the rule is to be mum anything that goes your way and the losers are left to complain and to look like whiners.
This old script will never improve the standard of refereeing.
When a coach admits that his team WON because of the refs calls then we'll see some movement. But now its the same old same old.
Possible solution:
Allow appeals.
This is how it could work, maybe limited to 2 per half, for video adjudication on penalties.
The tv audience knows the player slipped and got a tap on the chin, the player knows it, the commentators really know it ("at this stage of the game, that's harsh, really harsh" - Gus) but the ref doesn't.
Go upstairs and get a fair call, the captain can appeal it twice per half (like a tennis line call appeal). And if its a time waster the video ref can let it stand after one look, so only 10 seconds to review, unlike tries. But I don't think a team will call too many false calls cause they would squander the chance to reverse a penalty later in the game.
So we get more intrigue, better results and happier commentators 🙂
And it's also another wonderful opportunity for an ad break or sponsorship message.
What do you reckon?
'... yer, that penally in the front of their sticks gifted us the game. There was nothing in it, Fred was falling into the tackle and he only copped a tap on the chin. He was surprised to hear the whistle too. Not a high shot in my books, Thank you ref...'
But no, the rule is to be mum anything that goes your way and the losers are left to complain and to look like whiners.
This old script will never improve the standard of refereeing.
When a coach admits that his team WON because of the refs calls then we'll see some movement. But now its the same old same old.
Possible solution:
Allow appeals.
This is how it could work, maybe limited to 2 per half, for video adjudication on penalties.
The tv audience knows the player slipped and got a tap on the chin, the player knows it, the commentators really know it ("at this stage of the game, that's harsh, really harsh" - Gus) but the ref doesn't.
Go upstairs and get a fair call, the captain can appeal it twice per half (like a tennis line call appeal). And if its a time waster the video ref can let it stand after one look, so only 10 seconds to review, unlike tries. But I don't think a team will call too many false calls cause they would squander the chance to reverse a penalty later in the game.
So we get more intrigue, better results and happier commentators 🙂
And it's also another wonderful opportunity for an ad break or sponsorship message.
What do you reckon?
