I can't see this idea speeding decisions up.
Captain's Challenge trial http://yi.nzc.am/jFhyr
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
I can't see this idea speeding decisions up.
Captain's Challenge trial http://yi.nzc.am/jFhyr
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
They can't be serious can they ? It would get silly, they would challenge everything they could all the time.
Another massive step in the wrong direction. This will end up being used by captains as a way to get their team a rest when under pressure. There's also a very simple flaw in the idea in that it will presumably only cover errors of commission and not omission. In other words, if your team-mate gets his head knocked off and the ref misses it, you won't be able to launch a challenge (I can only assume this, as system would be open to horrendous abuse otherwise), but if your teammate is unfairly accused by the ref of committing a high tackle, you can.
EDIT: just read the article properly and realised it pertains to tries only. Less problematic but still an unwelcome development for me.
Can't see it changing the number of tries given that are actually knock ons.
Learned comment from The Don
Personally I think its a great idea. The captain has to be absolutely sure the ref has made the wrong call otherwise they then lose their challenge for the rest of that half. In almost every game these days players (not just the captain) run to the ref challenging them to go to the screen, claiming all manner of rubbish, for nearly every try scored.
To prevent players other than the captain approaching the Ref I'd make it an 8 point try (via a penalty in front of the sticks) if other players other than the captain challenge him.
Good idea for me, puts onus back on the ref and stops players begging for the screen after every try.
Don't have a problem if it stops the ref referring tries to the video ref. If we go back to the ref making all try or no try decisions himself with a captains challenge thrown in, fine.
But how will it work here? We don't have video refs at all games, only Sky games.
A good idea for me. Might stop games lasting over 2 hours with endless VR referrals
I'd rather have some delay to the game and get the right decision rather than have disgruntled players, coaches, fans et al. Unfortunately, it will still be reliant on the video refs making the correct decision and there is more than enough evidence highlighting their frailties to suggest there will still be incorrect calls made.
Can you imagine when RatBoy has the armband on (most games with SOL injury record) it will become even more of the Tomkins show
I think this is key for me. Over here the VR gets as much wrong as they get right. If a captain loses his right to challenge further due to the VR getting it wrong it will make them even more furious and we'll see some increased indiscipline as a result
It's a great idea in theory but once we involve humans and emotion it all falls apart
Personally i think something should be brought in to stop players and captains pestering the referees as much as they do. I don't watch Melbourne Storm games because its just 80 minutes of Cameron Smith whining to the ref.
They should let the captains have 4 referee approaches per half of rugby in any situation, try scoring scenario or any other. 4 is your lot. Once they are expended no more approaching the referee, for any reason.
screaming in the family corner, scaring the kiddies
Another crazy Australian idea. They have ruined the game with all their b*****ks
I don't really see a problem. If the captain gets it right then surely that's better than an incorrect referee decision? If the captain gets it wrong than he gets no more challenges in that half of the game. The only real concern I can see is if the challenge is in relation to a forward pass, but I'm guessing that won't be allowed.
It's a bit like the challenge in tennis, and nobody complains about that.
On reflection, my initial reaction was perhaps overly negative. It seems that the motivation behind the idea is to clear up rather than to add to the persistent intrusion of the video ref, so philosophically I can sympathise with it. There is a danger of throwing the baby out with the bath water, though. I'd like to see how keen people are on the idea after their side concedes two or three clearly bogus tries in a big match after their captain has used his challenge. Imagine, for example, Ben Currie having been awarded a try at the end of the cup final last week under those circumstances.
I get what you're saying but the tennis example is oversimplification of the matter. It's either in or out, the umpire can't see a ball on screen clearly out and go "I'm interpreting that as IN"
This season we've seen tries scored where someone is clearly offside, has put pressure on the catcher and has been interpreted as not impacting play as someone else touched down after the drop. If a captain correctly challenged this they would lose and would not be able to challenge again. Should another dubious try be scored against them in the same half they would be apoplectic with rage at the decision as they had no right to appeal remaining (wrongly in their view)
It's a good idea as I've said but relies entirely on getting interpretations locked down much better than they are currently
I think you've misunderstood what I said, in terms of the rules (player inside the 10) he would correctly challenge. However the VR (like the incident I mentioned) would interpret the rule differently. A different VR the week after might interpret like the captain did
As I said it all hinges on firming up the interpretations
(I realise that if he challenge stacks up he doesn't lose the right, same as tennis, same as cricket)
Therein lies the problem. How many times have we seen ridiculous "tries" awarded, when they are clearly not tries? This will just be used to waste time and earn players a breather, like the plod to the scrum and the throwing away of the ball at the goal line drop out. games are now expanding to ridiculous lengths of time as refs are constantly stopping the clock. Another slowing down of the game I'm afraid, making the product less palatable.
Great idea. Been saying it for years. It works in other sports so why not try it? It'll stop the likes of Ryan Atkins and others celebrating tries that were never tries. If the ref gives a no try decision, then unless the captain 'calls it otherwise' there'll be no point in his antics and they may stop.
Why we're on the subject of video refs, with the newish rule of the ref having an 'onfield' decision before referring, and only 100% proof can change the decision, why can't we now use this for forward passes? If you can't tell due to camera angles etc, then it's refs call, fair enough. But 'absolutely never in doubt forward passes no matter what camera angle you look from' will be able to be overturned. Seems so simple it'll never happen.
Born in St.Helens (Lancashire). Live in Hull. Probably die in Hull if I keep wearing this Red Vee.