Just heard something on the radio, apparently they are going to trial the video refs talking to the TV commentators to explain the calls they are making
Could be interesting
Could be interesting
Video ref
- Thread starter Kiwi Eagle
- Start date
-
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.
As long as the tv guys can't talk back! Though it may make interesting 'viewing.'
I cant get 'video ref killed the radio ref' outta my head.
I cant get 'video ref killed the radio ref' outta my head.
THE NRL will revolutionise rugby league forever on Friday with under-pressure video referees to publicly explain their decisions to millions of Channel Nine viewers.
The Daily Telegraph can exclusively reveal that video refs will be called upon to explain each contentious decision to television fans for the next two NRL rounds and then throughout the finals series.
After a decision is reached, Nine viewers will then hear audio from the video refs revealing why the decision was made and which rules were employed.
Play will not be stopped, the video ref’s explanation running for between five to ten seconds.
If the system is successful over the final two rounds, the NRL will look to play the video ref's audio through the public address system at every NRL ground for fans attending games.
Channel Nine and Fox Sports, the game's two broadcasters, have approved the plan.
Nine and Fox Sports commentators will discuss the controversial try, as usual, before then handing over to the video referee.
The senior of the two video referees will make the announcement.
"We are looking at ways of expanding the communication process around video referee decisions," said NRL head of football Todd Greenberg.
"We hope to achieve a greater level of transparency for the fans in relation to decisions made by the video referee.
"It's important to point out that it won’t mean that everyone will agree with decisions that are made, but they may at least understand the basis for the decision that was made.
"This will be in place for all matches in round 25 and if it's well received, we will consider other opportunities to also feed audio into our stadiums for the members and fans during the finals series.
"It's important rugby league continues to be innovative and progressive and this continues with our overarching vision to be regarded as a sport that is both entertaining and engaging at all levels."
Video referees have been under fire over the past two years.
They were involved in a number of blunders last season, culminating in the sacking of NRL referee co-coaches Bill Harrigan and Stuart Raper.
Their decisions may not improve but at least the public will be aware of the reasons behind each verdict.
Friday's game at Allianz Stadium between Wests Tigers and South Sydney will be the first time viewers hear from the video referee.
"It sounds like a great innovation," said NSW State of Origin coach Laurie Daley.
"The fans have always wanted to know why decisions are made from the video referee’s box and now they will.
"It is all about the game being transparent.
"It will be great the viewers – they will be involved in the game and the video ref's will probably be more understood too."
An on-line Daily Telegraph poll, which attracted more than 10,000 respondents,- actually gave the NRL video referees some support.
Asked what was worse - the NRL video referee or cricket’s DRS – only 20 percent voted for the rugby league version.
Cricket's DRS attracted nearly 36 percent of the vote.
Fans have not exactly given new Referee's Coach Daniel Anderson a strong endorsement.
Nearly 38 percent admitted the standard of refereeing had gone down since Anderson took over this year.
The Daily Telegraph can exclusively reveal that video refs will be called upon to explain each contentious decision to television fans for the next two NRL rounds and then throughout the finals series.
After a decision is reached, Nine viewers will then hear audio from the video refs revealing why the decision was made and which rules were employed.
Play will not be stopped, the video ref’s explanation running for between five to ten seconds.
If the system is successful over the final two rounds, the NRL will look to play the video ref's audio through the public address system at every NRL ground for fans attending games.
Channel Nine and Fox Sports, the game's two broadcasters, have approved the plan.
Nine and Fox Sports commentators will discuss the controversial try, as usual, before then handing over to the video referee.
The senior of the two video referees will make the announcement.
"We are looking at ways of expanding the communication process around video referee decisions," said NRL head of football Todd Greenberg.
"We hope to achieve a greater level of transparency for the fans in relation to decisions made by the video referee.
"It's important to point out that it won’t mean that everyone will agree with decisions that are made, but they may at least understand the basis for the decision that was made.
"This will be in place for all matches in round 25 and if it's well received, we will consider other opportunities to also feed audio into our stadiums for the members and fans during the finals series.
"It's important rugby league continues to be innovative and progressive and this continues with our overarching vision to be regarded as a sport that is both entertaining and engaging at all levels."
Video referees have been under fire over the past two years.
They were involved in a number of blunders last season, culminating in the sacking of NRL referee co-coaches Bill Harrigan and Stuart Raper.
Their decisions may not improve but at least the public will be aware of the reasons behind each verdict.
Friday's game at Allianz Stadium between Wests Tigers and South Sydney will be the first time viewers hear from the video referee.
"It sounds like a great innovation," said NSW State of Origin coach Laurie Daley.
"The fans have always wanted to know why decisions are made from the video referee’s box and now they will.
"It is all about the game being transparent.
"It will be great the viewers – they will be involved in the game and the video ref's will probably be more understood too."
An on-line Daily Telegraph poll, which attracted more than 10,000 respondents,- actually gave the NRL video referees some support.
Asked what was worse - the NRL video referee or cricket’s DRS – only 20 percent voted for the rugby league version.
Cricket's DRS attracted nearly 36 percent of the vote.
Fans have not exactly given new Referee's Coach Daniel Anderson a strong endorsement.
Nearly 38 percent admitted the standard of refereeing had gone down since Anderson took over this year.
I just wonder though, if the commentary shall be something like:
1) Ball gets grounded but dec sent upstairs to check.
2)Everyone in the world but refs see the ball grounded
3)Refs simply say they didn't see ball grounded
4)Frustration continues to grow.
5)GE wins tipping comp
1) Ball gets grounded but dec sent upstairs to check.
2)Everyone in the world but refs see the ball grounded
3)Refs simply say they didn't see ball grounded
4)Frustration continues to grow.
5)GE wins tipping comp
I'm keen to see how it runs and what we get out of it
Has the potential to be a very good addition to the coverage but will always cause debate
Has the potential to be a very good addition to the coverage but will always cause debate
Brissie Kid
Bencher
It is a sorry state of affairs that things are such a mess in the way they officiate rules that we need them to explain their decisions at all.
EagleFromMay1967
Sky Punching : send them High as the Clouds
Video refs: That was not a try. . . although he grounded the ball, clearly, its STEVE MATAI, therefore, obviously, . . . . its NO TRY.
I can't see why the NRL don't employ the same system they have in the NHL, I.e. referral to a central room at headquarters, so that each referral is adjudicated by a consistent panel. I fail to see why a dope like Luke Patten gets a job as a video ref. And while I'm ranting, why do we have to have 16 refs? Wy can't the two (preferably one) do a game on Friday and one on Sunday. Its not like they're taking the ball up or making tackles. Then maybe we could get rid of the duds.
Fluffy
Journey Man
it will not change anything as anyone who has listened to sports ears will know the refs often call out players for off side etc then do not blow a penalty if they get involved. Hence it is already public knowledge that they choose their decisions on more than just what they see
Captain Moondog
Absolute Superstar
One ref, two touchies was'nt perfect but it was a hell of a lot better than this.
The game has'nt improved one iota with two referees, video referees and changing the rules every five minutes and a lot of the rulings are so subjective it's hard to believe the officials are'nt biased.
The game has'nt improved one iota with two referees, video referees and changing the rules every five minutes and a lot of the rulings are so subjective it's hard to believe the officials are'nt biased.
Rex
Bencher
It is imperative the refs are not influenced one iota by the (obviously biased) TV commentators. So:
1. There must be no two way communication between the video ref and the commentators
2. The video refs must NOT hear the commentators' opnions on whether it was a try or not. Can anyone confirm this does not already happen? That video refs only see the vision and are physically barred from being able to hear the sound?
1. There must be no two way communication between the video ref and the commentators
2. The video refs must NOT hear the commentators' opnions on whether it was a try or not. Can anyone confirm this does not already happen? That video refs only see the vision and are physically barred from being able to hear the sound?
Hamster Huey
Space Invader
globaleagle said:
Don't agree with it. Why not simply take the Union lead and have the VR mic'ced to explain to the ref why he's going with his decision, so that we hear it (imagine Harrigan a few years ago explaining the Gasnier 'try', "No, I don't see any separation there...". There is no need to involve the commentators.
I thought it went ok, nothing to complain about at all
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
6 | 5 | 1 | 59 | 12 |
|
6 | 5 | 1 | 20 | 12 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 53 | 10 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 30 | 10 |
|
7 | 4 | 2 | 25 | 9 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | 40 | 8 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | 24 | 8 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | -8 | 8 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | -18 | 8 |
|
7 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 7 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | 31 | 6 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | 17 | 6 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -31 | 6 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | -41 | 6 |
|
7 | 2 | 5 | -29 | 4 |
|
6 | 1 | 5 | -102 | 4 |
|
6 | 0 | 6 | -90 | 2 |
