Not a rule, I don't think, but the way touch judges do nothing all game except come 10 - 15 metres onto the pitch when theres a turnover. WHY?
Not a rule, I don't think, but the way touch judges do nothing all game except come 10 - 15 metres onto the pitch when theres a turnover. WHY?
Loyal and true, not a glory hunter.
They also miss forward passes every game
The more I think about it the penalty in defensive half and 6 again in attacking half is a really good shout.
And give the video ref the responsibility to make the sound for the 6 again..
NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS
Insta @christianjamescreative
I’d like the referee/video referee be able to look at forward passes. I accept that there are many occasions where camera angles confuse the issue but there are some instances where the ball has clearly been passed forward and the movement of the ball from the passer’s hands confirms this. Such reviews are made regularly in rugby union without major controversy.
I’d also like the video referee to review quickly each try awarded to ensure that there is no glaring error by the on-field officials. Where there is some doubt, the video ref merely needs to hold matters up on field so that a more thorough look can be had.
Finally, I think the union method of review should be adopted. Rather than have to partially guess the outcome, the referee should either say “is there any reason why I cannot award a try” (where he would presently say “I have a try”) or “try or no try” where he’s unsure. The review process should then be a discussion between video- and on-field referee with the latter making the final decision.
Maybe it's too simple, the video ref watches the footage and makes a decision.
If they have some doubt - they can speak to the referee and ask for their opinion then?
The refs call was brought in to speed up the process was it not? In theory one or two views should confirm the on field decision, and more than that - there's doubt, so you go back to the original decision. However, the video ref will still look at something 20 times
I a actually like the 6 again, remember how exciting we played when it was first introduced. What I don’t like about it is the inconsistent officiating of it. The refs just seem to give or not give them on a whim. I understand what people are saying about being given a 6 again near your own line then being driven back over the line. Maybe clubs should use the likes of, for example, Sironen or Matautia rather than the likes of Bennison on those carries close to your own line.
The problem there is it's usually the winger or full back collecting the kick, and the next player at the ptb will be another of the back 3. I have to admit I don't know why at least 50% of 6 agains are awarded.
I think an area of the game that really gets me is reefing the ball out in the tackle and the ref gives it as a knock on. I have seen on numerous occasions when this has happened the replay clearly shows it was stripped illegally, but the decision of a knock on remains.
Can the video ref not intervene here, it seems silly if he can't.
A general change in refereeing could just involve referees looking at the big screen and changing their mind when it clearly shows their initial decision was wrong. They maintain a sort of legal fiction of not being able to see the big screen and being bound by their initial decision. This wouldn’t involve any rule change at all.
Somebody’s already mentioned it but RU refs and video refs work better together.
How do you check if they are correct or incorrect.
As a rough guide I was told that the ref allows about 5 seconds for the players to get off the tackle, if it gets to say 7 seconds then he'll penalise them. If its a surrender tackle he'll allow more time. The ref will also call 6 again if the defender Haa a hand on the ball.
But on some occasions the tackled player is holding the tackler down.
So much of it is down to the refs interpretation that it's difficult for us to say if it is correct or not. The ref is a lot closer than us but his view of the tackle is different from the TV camera angle so it's an occasion where we have to accept the refs call.
I like the idea penalty if its in the opposition half.
If a ref deems it is a cynical tactic then he should treat it as a professional foul and sin bin the offender.
A few seasons ago we were seeing team warnings for persistent offences but that seems to be out if favour these days
Been mentioned before, but a repeat set on tackle 1 is pointless. Should be a penalty. And allow the video ref to disallow a try for a forward pass (they do in union). Some are so blatant, it beggars belief that the ref or touch judge didn't see them.
I bought a pack of luminous condoms last week. The wife's face lit up.
For me I would amend the PTB ruling and make it strictly applied. The moment the tackled player is on his feet and places the ball on the ground then the opposition can’t have any contact and have to step back 1 metre.
How many times do we see the marker still interfering with the PTB and pushing down on the player, it makes the PTB slower and messy and some players mess up the PTB because they are off balance.
If the offence is committed in the ball carriers half then that tackle becomes null and void if offence committed in the opposition half then it’s a penalty.
Did Leigh just get awarded 6 again on the first tackle of a 7 tackle set?