An idea

[Spartan Eagle]

Seems you can now ground the ball with your d*ck...

As long as there is downward pressure and no separation.. then all good yeh.

 

[Bird of Prey]

Buzz words for commentators in the finals " the pass was flat " means it was forward but we ant going to say that and "great line speed in defence" means they are off side , but we won't mention that either.

 

[The Who]

Rugby League had been played since 1908 on the basis of "what you see is how the game is officiated". In other words, if it looks like a try to the naked eye it is a try. If it looks like the ball is knocked forward to the naked eye it is a knock on. Decision made - game moves on quickly. No time to review the decision, even if it is a wrong one.
Then the NRL decided the sport should be ruled by technology - technology that is officiated by a human!
If technology is so great then why does a human have the final say? Why doesn't the computer give us the answer...
"Hey Siri, how's the Peach's finger after coping such a blow to it when knocking that ball on, or was it a try"?
Blow Up The Bunker

 

[Mwseintville]

Can the Bunker be called on only to officiate grounding of the ball (including foot on touch line etc) and only at match speed, not slow motion where laws of physics indicate that unless the player slams it down hard, there will always appear to be separation.

If they stopped allowing the video ref to rule on forward passes because of angles, then why still offside? Stop wasting precious time on replay after replay and let the touch judges and referees rule with their eyes in real time. The fans will start coming back.

I wish they would get rid of the video ref altogether and go back to one ref and in goal touchies and make them make an actual decision.

 

[Supreme Leader]

I think that there should be a simplified process. The referee calls for a review without stating try or no try. Stating I want to check the following and then a decision can be made considering all the facts provided rather than this bollocks of inconclusive evidence to overturn a call, we say that today with the Taumololo try, there was severe doubt about that. The stripping rule has to be reviewed as well as that is a total lottery now and forward passes should be scrutinized by the bunker because that is a pet hate of most of us fans who see blatant forward pass trys awarded. The NRL MUST review the whole process and make it easier for the referees to be able to just officiate.

Totally agree, issue here is the half full or half empty approach. Shouldn't benefit of the doubt go with the attacking team? Whilst the bunker is in use, interpretation will still be used unequally based on hidden agendas. Why in NFL they have access to technology and rarely is there a mistake, surely someone could cop a plane ticket to see what we can use to fix forward passes and offside. Even if its grid lines on a TV rather than an eyesight opinion form someone who is most likely tanked in the bunker anyway. Fair dinkum I reckon my calls on games are closer to being right than these idiots. I'm happy to sit in the bunker for Manly games next year!

Whilst there is no measure of accountability nothing will change.