Refs

[Mark from Brisbane]

Which is why we need to be at least 10% better than them, is that possible???

Hell yeah!!

 

[Stevo]

That video ref try was a howler

The initial call from the on field ref is having too much bearing. There needs to be a 50/50 option in there somehow for when they generally don't have a clue and are guessing what happened then the video ref gets locked into working with that call

I don't see why a referee has to give an opinion of a try he hasn't seen?

 

[mickqld]

yes the refs must have received a memo telling them 'blow less penalties this weekend' unfortunately this will not help too much in the souffs game as it is getting all the 50/50 calls go your way that helps them enormously along with the times they should be penalised and get away with it. don't see this changing on Fri night

I think less penalties will help us enormously Miss Kate. If they don't get the leg up from a 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 penalty count advantage they will struggle. Our defense will dominate them if we have to do an even share of tackles and posession.The vermin relies heavily on back to back sets with quick play the balls so they can roll over the top of u.The refs have been under so much **** lately they won't dare do anything other than give out limited penalties this week. We have the advantage if we have even posession. The vermin have not dominated us at all in the 2 games played unless they've had the overwhelming posession advantage.

 

[Stevo]

I think Tooveys rant the other week was perfectly timed.

 

[MissKate]

That video ref try was a howler

The initial call from the on field ref is having too much bearing. There needs to be a 50/50 option in there somehow for when they generally don't have a clue and are guessing what happened then the video ref gets locked into working with that call

I don't see why a referee has to give an opinion of a try he hasn't seen?

I don't have a problem with them giving an opinion but I thought the rules implied that if they didn't see what happened they were supposed to give it as a try and let the video refs confirm or overturn. unfortunately for us, shayne hayne always rules the opposite to that

 

[Clint]

yes the refs must have received a memo telling them 'blow less penalties this weekend' unfortunately this will not help too much in the souffs game as it is getting all the 50/50 calls go your way that helps them enormously along with the times they should be penalised and get away with it. don't see this changing on Fri night

I think less penalties will help us enormously Miss Kate. If they don't get the leg up from a 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 penalty count advantage they will struggle. Our defense will dominate them if we have to do an even share of tackles and posession.The vermin relies heavily on back to back sets with quick play the balls so they can roll over the top of u.The refs have been under so much s**t lately they won't dare do anything other than give out limited penalties this week. We have the advantage if we have even posession. The vermin have not dominated us at all in the 2 games played unless they've had the overwhelming posession advantage.

It's not just the penalty itself that is crucial, but when during the tackle count the penalty is given. The refs have sooo much power to subtly influence games.

 

[StuBoot]

That video ref try was a howler

The initial call from the on field ref is having too much bearing. There needs to be a 50/50 option in there somehow for when they generally don't have a clue and are guessing what happened then the video ref gets locked into working with that call

I don't see why a referee has to give an opinion of a try he hasn't seen?

I don't have a problem with them giving an opinion but I thought the rules implied that if they didn't see what happened they were supposed to give it as a try and let the video refs confirm or overturn. unfortunately for us, shayne hayne always rules the opposite to that

Someone ( Bones, I think )mentioned a few weeks ago after the Matai no try that there's something in the rulebook says if the referee is unsure/unsighted he shouldn't award or not award a try so it's squarely on the video refs then.
The way they've ruled this year is unless there is conclusive evidence either way the on field ref's decision stands so if the onfield ref's not sure he shouldn't make a call, most commentators etc agree that both Matai's and Sisa Waqa's "no tries" were trys but there was no conclusive evidence.

 

[Dan]

yes technically if the ref can not see it, he must rule a try unless he thought or could see it was held up.

So he can't say "I couldn't see, so no try" it must be "Try, I couldn't see, can you check the grounding please"

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

I'm happy for the on-field ref to continue to make the try decision, based on how they see it. And for the video ref to only overturn it if clearly wrong.

I was pleased with the Jorge decision because it meant we finally got one back, as we have lost some obvious tries recently on this rule (eg Matai's). Here the ref thought it was a try, and that opinion was probably a stroke of good luck for us this time.