1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Match Officials

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by EagleRock40, Aug 31, 2010.

Should we go back to 1 referee & 2 linesmen?

This poll will close on Feb 7, 2106 at 5:28 PM.
  1. Yes

    0 vote(s)
  2. No

    0 vote(s)
  3. Yes - and with 2 video challenges per team

    0 vote(s)
  1. EagleRock40

    EagleRock40 Well-Known Member

    +211 /4
    At the present time, I feel the NRL does not have enough competent referees to persist with the 2 referee system. There are crucial mistakes in just about every game, and most can affect the match result and positions in the top 8 at the business end of the year.
    For mine - back to 1 referee and 2 linesmen....and each team gets 2 captains challenges per game. The challenges are viewed by the 3 officials and if the decision is overturned, you do not lose the challenge.
  2. Dan

    Dan Kim Jong Dan Staff Member Administrator 2016 Tipping Competitor 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +7,751 /120
    The 2 ref system clearly is not working and has been a failure since it was implemented.

    One ref, one series of calls throughout the game and thats it.

    How many delayed calls do we get these days and how many wrong calls? There were always bad calls in games but not to the degree and regularity we see now
  3. ManlyBacker

    ManlyBacker Winging it Staff Member

    +972 /7
    The 2 refs has resulted in a lack of consistency in areas such as speed of play the balls, holding in tackles etc and just isn't working.
    The video ref has picked up on numerous instances where the ball wasn't grounded properly or lost over the line and that is a positive in my mind.
    I am definitely in favour of a captain two challenge system. When something is blatantly wrong there must be some way to get it corrected. It works fine in the NFL.
  4. Ralphie

    Ralphie Well-Known Member Premium Member

    +2,953 /287
    When the 2 ref system came in they raved that it would speed the ruck up and make for a more entertaining game.

    What it has done by speeding up the ruck is make it a bash & barge dumbie half run game with an associated increase in BS penalties.

    1 Referee for me please.
  5. Chuck

    Chuck Active Member

    +103 /7
    Yes bringing challenges into NRL will work, as it has worked well in tennis and cricket so far.

    But the biggest problem is getting rid of benefit of the doubt. It is simply the most ridiculous rule in sports.
  6. The Eagle

    The Eagle Well-Known Member

    +480 /0
    Chuck the bigger problem is refs call which should go back to benefit of the doubt,the ref had no idea,sent it to someone upstairs who still had no idea and that moron sends it back with no idea

    Call it a benefit of the doubt try,if neither official has an idea,benefit of the doubt must prevail
  7. Supernintendo Chalmers

    Supernintendo Chalmers Well-Known Member

    +843 /9
    how about 2 points + kick for goal if its a benefit of the doubt try / not completely clear cut etc
    full points only rewarded if it's a clear and obvious grounding of the ball with hand
    get rid of the grounding with torso all together, hand on ball, on ground, and in control or no points at all.
  8. jbb/james

    jbb/james Well-Known Member Premium Member

    +1,497 /35
    on the weekends game, it was clearly audible on the channel 9 coverage. archer was giving cecchin a bit of a serve, telling him to keep up, stay in his pocket, that he needed his assistance and that there was still plenty in the game. Good words from archer but what was cecchin who controls his own games as well doing. Formed a picture in my mind he was either bludging or not concentrating. Why have 2 refs if one uses it as an opportunity to relax, or tune out
  9. Mark from Brisbane

    Mark from Brisbane Living the dream Premium Member

    +19,684 /383
    Does anyone have an IED we can use on Cecchin?
  10. Utility Player

    Utility Player Well-Known Member

    +514 /6
    An IUD would be more appropriate for that ****.
  11. susan

    susan Well-Known Member

    +2,357 /56
    not sure what the challenges would achieve.we basically have a challenge system now with players running in to get the refs to go to video on every try.

    who is the challenge made to?another dopey fool asleep in a room behind the other dopey fool in the video refs box.

    take matai for example last week.lyon tells archer to look at matai being taken out.in other words he challenges it.they look t the video and the hampster f...cks it up.

    a challenge is only as good as the idiot looking at it.

    surely we can't have a situation where the video ref looks at it and if the captain doesnt agree with the video ref someone else looks at it.the way we are heading we'll end up with viewers voting try or no try via sms like big brother.

    one of the problems with the game is that the refs dont have to use their eyes from 3 metres away,they abrogate the responsibilty and just send it upstairs.if you know you can go upstairs there is not the urgency to get the best view in real time and standards drop from there.

    if we do have to use a video turn it around and allow the defensive side to get the doubt.any doubt at all then no try.would result in far less errors and would get rid of thiose bull**** downward/pressure,no separation rulings.

  12. Chuck

    Chuck Active Member

    +103 /7
    I disagree RE: which is the bigger problem, and if there is ANYONE that believes that in sport if there is doubt, you should give that team an advantage, is kidding themselves.

Share This Page