standard of refereeing

[EagleBoi13]

One word, inconsistent.

another word (with a hyphen this time!) sub-standard.

Is it too much to expect that quality of refereeing to increase to the same professional level our players show week in and week out within the NRL compeition. Honestly, its just not bloody good enough.

Couple of howlers from the weekend:
Riff player got 10mins in the bin within 3 minutes of 1st half for slowing down play of the ball and holding down a rorter player. WTF?!

Tigpie player blatantly tripped by Bulldog after chip and chase (which back in the day was an automatic send off for tripping) and was penalised but not sin binned.

Souffs and Storm players continually walking off the mark to get a quick play of the ball with intention of taking the markers out of play. Not one penalty and they did it all weekend long (worst that happens is they get asked to go back to the mark and play the ball; this needs to start being penalised as players are taking the piss)

Not to mention the vid ref overruling on T-Red's try, calling an obstruction on Ferris. Bad call.

Question: give ONE logical reason why the video ref can't over rule the on field ref re: blatant forward pass? We get subjected to replay after replay showing an incorrect decision, even have to put up with commentators discussing how far forward the pass went, and nobody does a fkn thing?!

Sports such as tennis and cricket have evolved and now include a challenge system. Wake up NRL, the way this great game is being officiated is an absolute disgrace. Lord knows, we were robbed the GF last year. Better not happen again ..... Lift ya game pinkies!!

 

[bob dylan]

It was utter ****e last night, for both sides.

The ruck is a joke.

The 10 metres is a joke.

Don't even start me on the 2 Refs or video ref systems.

Id like to see any player that speaks to the ref (including the captains) sin binned. The way Hayne and Ennis carry on each week is beyond belief.

 

[globaleagle]

Did you see when badger told benji to play on quickly after a penalty but he had it wrong and had to call him back. Then he tried to say 'I was saying yes to something the other ref was saying to me."

bullpoop.

Last night there was the above incident and 1 other where the 1 ref had to tell the other one he had it wrong. Plus the ferris obstruction was wrong (or at best inconsistent.)

Besides my usual histrionics at the ref's being anti manly.....(lol)...this was the first game in awhile where I actually felt these refs were a little behind the pace. Too many fundamental errors.

 

[Fluffy]

Why is a guy who stops the game for a head knock for 3 -4 minutes not forced from the field under the concussion rule by the ref?

 

[The Who]

Agreed, the refereeing standard is poor. The reason, imo, is that they are under so much scrutiny from video and commentators they are muddle-minded.
Whilst I favour refs making on-field decisions, as soon as they make a bad one they get crucified. It is leading to them going upstairs to protect themselves, slowing down the game and turning the rules into a lottery.
Perfect example was last night when a try was given to T-Red, but the ref still went upstairs and somehow a no-try resulted. I doubt there was anyone at the ground who watched the try would have questioned its validity.
As soon as RL introduced trial-by-video any confidence we had in the ref was lost.
It has happened in cricket. Umpires won;t rule on obvious run-outs, and the captain's challenge has further eroded umpiring credibility.

 

[HappilyManly]

1 referee to be in charge the whole game.

The other guy can keep looking at the ruck and offside like the bloody Linesmen are supposed to.

 

[RiverEagle]

Yep, it's a crap-shoot every game now.

Agree with all of the above, but especially reverting back to just one referee.

It's clearly a failure and only confusing the lot of us.

Tred's try last night (disallowed) is a perfect example.

Worse ''obstructions'' have bee allowed numerous times this year; and I'm worried we're going to see some serious howlers in the semi-finals, or even the GF.

 

[sheridanstand78]

Referees are no longer allowed to follow their instinct. Their power has been diluted by video referees and other officials.

We survived so long easily with one referee and I would like that to return.

The NRL have made it so much harder with all these rules like obstruction, where its a lottery yet forward passes are consistently ignored and often decide games.

 

[Manly To Win!]

making the video refs be able to rule on forward passes leading to tries would be a good start in the right direction

 

[dowdz]

It must be hard for them. All you here from commentators is, why do we always have to check everything. Then Hayne makes a instinct call and bam, he is a villain. Can't have it both ways. Either except the calls and move on, or end up like NFL

 

[HoldenV8]

After I voted it was 20-0 in favour of no. Only 20? lol

From my own point of view, the biggest problem is inconsistent calls. And the biggest problem with that is having two referees with two different rule interpretations. Its been proven at international level......rugby league does not need two referees.

Have to agree with @sheridanstand78 in that referees don't follow their instincts. How many times do we see a clear cut try, yet the men in pink send it upstairs for something silly like checking the grounding? If you can clearly see its a try.....blow the bloody whistle and call a damn try for crying out loud. I know a lot of people didn't like Bill Harrigan's refereeing, sometimes with good reason. But one thing I liked about Billy was that even after the video ref was brought into Australia in Super League's only season, more often than not he had the courage to call or deny a try without wasting time going upstairs. If the video proved he got the call wrong, so be it, but at least he had the guts to back his own judgement.

Remember the try that won NSW the first game of the 1987 Origin series? If that was 2014 we'd have spent 5 minutes looking at the video, but back then Mick Stone backed his own judgement and called a try.....which proved to be the correct call, even the Queenslanders admitted he got it right. Its something I wish we saw more of.

 

[Dan]

The major issue with the two ref system is that you do not get any sense of consistency. You have two refs with two different opinions and points of view, meaning that depending on who is policing the ruck on what set, you are going to get different calls.

One thing that would make the game much more consistent with two refs would be that you have the same ref policing the ruck the entire game, and the other policing the rest of the game.

With them switching, you get ebbs and flows in the penalties.

That would make a world of difference in my opinion.

The other way is to have one ref who polices the entire game on the field and another ref who either runs with the ref on the field and acts only in an advisory state, or you have a second video ref who acts as the second referee, who has constant access to two camera angles that are the same throughout the match, he can then advise on infringements in the ruck or elsewhere that the other referee has missed.

This could be done without stoppages to monitor the play and done real time from a box no where near the ground if needs be.

I think its clear that the only people who like having two refs is the NRL the rest of the fan base think it is just terrible

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

I voted yes.

But I was only kidding.

 

[Eagles2nv]

The reffing has been bad. They really need to seriously review the reffing situation.

The biggest issue is inconsistency between the on field refs. The other issue is constantly going upstairs.

I'll admit, refs calling try/no try has helped, but there are still some baffling calls (particularly around obstructions).

 

[TokyoEagle]

1 referee who also does the video him/herself from the sideline.

 

[MadMarcus]

1 referee who also does the video him/herself from the sideline.

Hayne would love the opportunity to video himself.

 

[globaleagle]

I voted yes.

But I was only kidding.

I sent your choice to the video pollster.....

....and your yes vote was....... overruled!


@dan Your point about 1 ref for the ruck makes sense. I'd like to see that before the 2 ref system were to be thrown out.

Moving on....

With regards to my above comment; I thought the refs made a few basic errors last night. Rulings were the other ref had to go "no mate, that's wrong, it's a scrum." As opposed to the usual fan interpretation of a mistake.



The thing I notice when watching the ESL who only have the one ref, is everyone has a more acceptance of the system.

Referees will let the game flow if minor indiscretions don't lead to major game changes. eg: If the play the ball isn't exactly square on, the ref's let it go. (unless it's 1 metre out and leads to a try.)

Additionally captains don't consistently challenge penalty calls; either to give their players a rest, or genuine whining.

There is coverage of the video refs talking through the decision so you watch them watching the replays.

The commentators don't scream over a minor mishap and show it 400 times on HD replays. (400 may be an exaggeration)

And the media don't complain out any mistakes like they've just lost their first child, like they do here. Just on this point, too many of our journo's have axes to grind. so they will carry on for days about that 'no try' to the tigers 2 weeks ago (which upon reflection I agree it was a no try) calling it the games biggest blunder....they will refer to foz's apparent knock on to put the cowboys out of the finals like that was the only reason...BUT they leave the try of thurstons - which came from a strip, pure and simple alone. So the media have agendas which we've seen over the last couple of days.


In essence, we've become less accepting as nrl-ites

 

[Dan]

I voted yes.

But I was only kidding.

I sent your choice to the video pollster.....

....and your yes vote was....... overruled!


@dan Your point about 1 ref for the ruck makes sense. I'd like to see that before the 2 ref system were to be thrown out.

Moving on....

With regards to my above comment; I thought the refs made a few basic errors last night. Rulings were the other ref had to go "no mate, that's wrong, it's a scrum." As opposed to the usual fan interpretation of a mistake.



The thing I notice when watching the ESL who only have the one ref, is everyone has a more acceptance of the system.

Referees will let the game flow if minor indiscretions don't lead to major game changes. eg: If the play the ball isn't exactly square on, the ref's let it go. (unless it's 1 metre out and leads to a try.)

Additionally captains don't consistently challenge penalty calls; either to give their players a rest, or genuine whining.

There is coverage of the video refs talking through the decision so you watch them watching the replays.

The commentators don't scream over a minor mishap and show it 400 times on HD replays. (400 may be an exaggeration)

And the media don't complain out any mistakes like they've just lost their first child, like they do here. Just on this point, too many of our journo's have axes to grind. so they will carry on for days about that 'no try' to the tigers 2 weeks ago (which upon reflection I agree it was a no try) calling it the games biggest blunder....they will refer to foz's apparent knock on to put the cowboys out of the finals like that was the only reason...BUT they leave the try of thurstons - which came from a strip, pure and simple alone. So the media have agendas which we've seen over the last couple of days.


In essence, we've become less accepting as nrl-ites

Actually a very valid point that I have thought about for a while and you will see mentioned in some of my posts in the game day chat.

I just wish that the commentators would keep their opinions to themselves and call the game rather than go on about their stance on various rules or rulings.

It does not make for good entertainment and is most often wrong anyway.

Just call the game and dont allow the media bashing, it just doesn't help and it is clear the game can be run without those things, or else the ESL would be going through the same issues we are.

You could argue the game over there isn't as higher quality but you could equally argue that, that has more to do with the talent and skills of the players rather than the refereeing.

 

[globaleagle]

There's a game day chat?


lolololololwoooooo


At one point 1 commentator was saying 'do we have to send everything upstairs?" - at a reference to a vid review to determine a goal line drop out.


The other one was "well do you want to get it right, or do you want to let the game flow?"


A choice I never thought was mutually exclusive.

 

[Dan]

There's a game day chat?


lolololololwoooooo


At one point 1 commentator was saying 'do we have to send everything upstairs?" - at a reference to a vid review to determine a goal line drop out.


The other one was "well do you want to get it right, or do you want to let the game flow?"


A choice I never thought was mutually exclusive.

hahaha exactly these things should be able to be determined way better than they are.

In all honesty there is probably more value in having sideline cameras and check for the odd call where it goes out, and have the touch judges in the in goals

That would probably solve a lot more