Refs: joke, joke, joke, joke, joke

[bazeagle]

The 2 ref thing is a farce and needs to go. Now. It's a fully farcical situation in an elite sport where the refs are so ultra hyper keen to ping any infringements in the ruck that they have no clue where they're meant to be on the field. There's been three joke problems mid game after the famous Thurston issue, now Foran and also the stupid ref was in the way of a pass along the back line in the roosters game.
Get rid of the second ref before it causes a genuine game changing issue.

 

[The Who]

It's a bit like the video ref - neither of these innovations has made the game better or the rulings more accurate.

Back to the original please.

 

[bazeagle]

I don't mind the vid ref so much.
But I would put the second ref upstairs and take that clown off the field. Because it also seems to me that one log vid ref takes forever to decide and also gets it wrong really often.
So on the basis that two logs are better than one, station the other dickhead up in the vid ref's box.

 

[bob dylan]

How often do these fools get in the way of the play.

I agree Baz, get rid of the 2nd ref.

 

[bazeagle]

They are so amazingly staggeringly inept.

 

[firechild]

Surprise, surprise, another admission that a crucial error was made against Manly.

http://www.nrl.com/official-view-ex...on-rule/tabid/11010/newsid/64025/default.aspx

I never subscribed to the conspiracy theories but they are beginning to get harder to dismiss. It seems that every second week Manly gets a mention in the "Official View" and every time it is because we are on the wrong end of a dud call.The Cowboys, Rabbitohs, Knights, Tigers, Panthers and Dragons (that I can recall off the top of my head) have all benefitted from rediculous calls against Manly, 4 of those have been in the last 4 games Manly have played. More refs, more mistakes. I agree with moving one of the idiots to the box. Perhaps having 2 sets of eyes on the screen might allow some errors to be picked up before they are turned into match deciding errors. Increasing the number of officials hasn't done anything to rectify the problems they were implemented to solve, they have simply increased the frustration for players, club officials and spectators who have a higher expectation coming from more officials observing the game.

 

[bob dylan]

Can anyone explain why the video ref can adjudicate on offside players but not forward passes???

 

[bazeagle]

Thats a very good point Bob Dylan. And such an obvious one.
Both issues are determined by the angle of the camera relative to the play.
Another inconsistent joke.

 

[firechild]

As was suggested by Slothfield, given the technology we have available (look at what they're using in cricket and tennis) why can they not apply a grid, or at least lines to the screen that clearly indicate things like forward passes and offside? Change the rule, who cares about what direction the hands are facing, if the ball travels forwards, it's a forward pass, if it goes backwards, then it's good. How hard is that?

 

[bazeagle]

Yeah Firechild. Us fans and the commentators can see that a pass is forward or not. So if the on field dickheads can't see it and kinda fair enough the speed of play can be deceptive then let the 2 vid ref tools decide. All they have to do is see what we all see on TV. Supremely simple.

 

[Masked Eagle]

I think the systems, ie 2 refs and video refs are good. Problem is the people doing the jobs.

No doubt the 2 refs has helped clean up the ruck, which needed to happen otherwise the way the Storm were taking the game instead of calling held the ref would count to 3 to say he's got the pin. And despite the odd clanger from the video ref, how many times have tries been called that would have otherwise been disallowed? Especially with wingers diving for the corner?

The easiest way to clean up the forward pass rule is to get rid of this, backwards out of the hands, they are really guessing with this anyway. Just say if the person receiving the pass, catches the ball from infront of where the player passed it, then its forward. Heck you can even use GPS in the ball to make a decision.

 

[Stevo]

Yeah righto..................:tumbleweed:

 

[ayjay007]

2 things.In the Manly tigers game,the refs wore their pink.It is confusing,and I said at the time,why can't they wear yellow,orange or green (or those colours in flouro),when Manly play in their home strip,or the rorters or dragons play in one of their predominantly red strips.Lo and behold,sunday,out comes the clown brigade (refs) in yellow for the st merge game (presumably cause the chokers were in their red tops).Why cant the No Real Leadership think that far ahead all the time?The second thing is my pet hate,and the commentators bought it up on sunday.When the on-field ref says he is happy with some part of the lead-up to a try,or the put down,why does the vid ref look at everything? On sunday,souffs scored,and he said quite clearly,"I'm happy with the put down,but can you check the onside for me?I'm happy with the put down."Now,to your normal every day person,that means LOOK AT THE OFFSIDE,not everything in the lead-up!This to me is proof that they LOOKING for ways to disallow tries.If the on-field ref is happy,the clown upstairs shouldn't be allowed to over-rule him!

 

[The Who]

despite the odd clanger from the video ref . . .

Odd clanger?? It happens in every match.
The rulings were more correct when the one on-field referee judged all decisions, at true speed, not slowed down. Normal speed is the only way to get a true gut feel for whether someone has scored. If it looks like a try then that should be sufficient.
These slow motion, finger tip, no separation crap decisions not only kill the moment they cause far more controversy than they solve, and must financially cost a fortune to have.

 

[Jono]

"In the Tigers v Manly game, was the pass that put the Tigers in the lead forward?

Yes, in our view it was forward. We are not about to try and manufacture an excuse to hide that fact. I simply felt the officials made an incorrect call and that has been pointed out. Mistakes will be made from time to time. We need to do all we can to prevent them, and part of that is putting your hand up to acknowledge an error. "

OK, then someone explain to me why in the past year there have been 3 mistakes in Manly games? I'm sorry but this is more than just "mistakes will be made from time to time".

 

[Jerry1]

In the Tigers v Manly game, was the pass that put the Tigers in the lead forward?

Yes, in our view it was forward. We are not about to try and manufacture an excuse to hide that fact. I simply felt the officials made an incorrect call and that has been pointed out. Mistakes will be made from time to time. We need to do all we can to prevent them, and part of that is putting your hand up to acknowledge an error.

FM - I said this before but two touch judges who's sole purpose is to rule on this missed it also two refs get it wrong - one of them surely would have the nonce to see what every other person in the stadium noticed.

 

[MadMarcus]

What Bill is really saying...

In the Tigers v Manly game, was the pass that put the Tigers in the lead forward?

Yes, in our view it was forward. We are not about to try and manufacture an excuse to hide that fact [like we did with Foran's knock on last week]. I simply felt the officials made an incorrect call and that has been pointed out [That's right folks, we can't think of anything even remotely believable to justify this clanger.]. Mistakes will be made from time to time [but not when I was refereeing, god I was brilliant]. We need to do all we can to prevent them, and part of that is putting your hand up to acknowledge an error [Sucked in Manly, I have so much power. What are you going to do about it? Who has the cement truck now Bozo?].

Was the first try to the Titans after Greg Bird’s strip a knock-on similar to the one from the Manly game last week that you addressed?

It is very similar to the Manly try that was disallowed last week against the Panthers [I'm onto you. You're trying to say I was wrong last week, well I'm too smart for you... get this india!]. The initial strip definitely goes forward and had it been sent to the video referee [because all video refs have PhDs in physics so they (along with me of course) are qualified to reinvent the laws of it], it probably would have been ruled a knock-on and disallowed [Are you still buying this 'spinning of the ball' crap? I hope so.] .

I think the reason it wasn’t picked up and the referees thought it was okay was the way the ball went flying back to the Titans [I hope nobody remembers that last week I said that a ball that went spinning backwards was a knock-on...]. The initial strip goes forward into Uate before going backwards and leading to the Gold Coast try - it should have been ruled a knock-on [Of course the difference last week was that the ball Foran stripped didn't hit an opposition player after he stripped it, but you idiots are too stupid to pick that up.].

 

[Masked Eagle]

despite the odd clanger from the video ref . . .

Odd clanger?? It happens in every match.
The rulings were more correct when the one on-field referee judged all decisions, at true speed, not slowed down. Normal speed is the only way to get a true gut feel for whether someone has scored. If it looks like a try then that should be sufficient.
These slow motion, finger tip, no separation crap decisions not only kill the moment they cause far more controversy than they solve, and must financially cost a fortune to have.

Would young hoppa's try in Origin been given without video refs? What about Josh Dugans miracle put down last year? I doubt it.

I agree that they can sometimes confuse themselves with the slow motion replays but I don't think there would be less controversy if we did away with them. If a try gets awarded that shouldn't be or denied when it should be people are going to get upset. Video refs or not.

 

[Darren]

it happens with all teams, read other websites and loads of whinging, some think we get all the calls with the way we play.

 

[bazeagle]

Tonight's match - Luke Burt runs smack into the ref, could have got to the storm player to effect a tackle. Dorky massive clown ref says to Burt: "We have to be somewhere". Yes ref. Just not there. If there was only one ref - problem gone. Massive issue - that try doesn't get scored if Burt tackles the storm player, maybe Eels win? Who knows?