[Resurrected] The Bunker

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

SirPigman

Member
No No No, There has to be an investigation. Hmmm we have a Bunker that cost 2 Million Dollars but we are not using the technology.

1. We have GPS on all players giving real time stats to the bench. Forget the 2 legs behind kicker just check the 2 players GPS. Was he in front or not ?


2. GPS could be put in ball. Forget the “Did it go backwards from the hands”. Did the ball travel forward Yes or No ? I realise the ball has momentum but players will soon learn to throw the ball backward .5m


Ok it doesn't solve the “Did it touch the hands” call last night but 75% of contentious calls this weekend solved. No grey just Black & White.


Thanks Bunker
 
The only real time a ball has enough momentum to go noticeably forward is when players are running in the clear at pace and passing over a decent distance---98% of instances where the momentum argument is used is over complicating the matter.

The two legs behind the kicker rule is pointless, you can never make a 100% certain decision from such a distance and viewing angle, line ball situations,if the chaser looks onside he is onside, has to be obviously offside to rule against.
 
IMG_5909.JPG
 
These Sutton brothers have a long historyof stuff ups and suspensions. Howthe the hell they still have a job boggels the mind.get toovey in the bunker next year!.
 
These Sutton brothers have a long historyof stuff ups and suspensions. Howthe the hell they still have a job boggels the mind.get toovey in the bunker next year!.
His old man wasn't real popular up around my parts reffing games back in the day either if you talk to the locals .
 
The NRL are in denial about the bunker. Every week games are decided by them and there is no accountability. The referees have been coached to outsource decisions and the fact that the bunker is not able to overturn forward passes which continue to blight the game like the one the Whingers copped for Drizzle try 1. What they did to us over Dylans try and the Peachey farce confirms what a mess they are in.
 
Mark Carrol brought up a good point tday.The ref has to award try or no try after seeing it once in a split second. Meaning he has no idea if it was touched or not. Why cant they say that they dont f.cken know if its try or not and give the bunker full ruling.
 
Mark Carrol brought up a good point tday.The ref has to award try or no try after seeing it once in a split second. Meaning he has no idea if it was touched or not. Why cant they say that they dont f.cken know if its try or not and give the bunker full ruling.
So what decision does the bunker make in that situation?It wasn't conclusive that he touched it.Im fine with the Peachey try because there wasn't conclusive evidence to overturn,same as if he'd ruled "no try".Issue is that the same process wasn't followed in the Walker try.
 
ABC Offsiders made the point, das Bunker has been fairly conservative all year, so why pull out these howlers now?

Also, Andrew Johns was talking real time V slow-mo.
He said Tries are becoming a CSI investigation instead of an entertaining sport.
 
Last edited:
Why dont we just fk the Bunker off altogether and save the $.

I was a big advocate for the bunker originally but it really is not working. I think it would have been better if the same person was in the box for all games, this would have improved consistency at least.
How a couple of fools looking at a million replays can still get it so wrong so often baffles my mind.

Let the on-field refs make the final decision and at least then we can forgive some split second human error at times.
Have the TV networks minimise the replays shown on tele and instruct the commentators to dial the negativity and critisicm down a notch if the refs do get it wrong on field.
 
So what decision does the bunker make in that situation?It wasn't conclusive that he touched it.Im fine with the Peachey try because there wasn't conclusive evidence to overturn,same as if he'd ruled "no try".Issue is that the same process wasn't followed in the Walker try.
Agree. That's the crux of it.
 
The Bunker is a disgrace . It has proven to be a failure . The refs can be excused for making split second errors but these people in the bunker who watch replays in slow motion and different angles have no excuse .
The bunker is an embarrassment to the NRL and so are the people running the NRL
The coaches may get fined for saying how they see it but at least us fans don't
TO THE HIGH PAID NRL INCOMPETENT WHO THINK THEY ARE DOING A GOOD JOB RUNNING THE GAME I SAY THIS
************************************
YOU WOULD DO A GREAT JOB
IN RUNNING A BROTHEL BECAUSE YOU HAVE TURNED OUR GREAT GAME INTO ONE .
************************************
 
Hold on people. The problem is not the bunker but the rules.

When the ref says 'I have try' then the bunker has to find - beyond any doubt - complete proof otherwise to overturn. The 50-50 call has already been decided.

I agree with Barrett, there should be a third option:

1) Try. 2) No try. 3) No ****ing idea.

The signal could be a shrug of the shoulders and palms up.
The bunker boys can then use the technology to call it as we all see it, rather than to seek incontrovertible proof either way to overturn.
 

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom