Video Ref

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

The Who

Journey Man
Was I the only one who couldn't believe he awarded Newcastle's first try? Have we changed the rules to gridiron where you can drop the ball over the line and it is awarded?

It's just a lottery when they refer decisions upstairs. This season will again be marred by video decisions. With all that technology brought in to make 100% correct rulings I reckon they still average 50%.
 
The refs should make the decsion on whether a try is scored or not and then the video ref should only check each decision to make sure that there is not a blatant issue when the decsion should be reversed.

Also awarding penalties for scrum infringements FFS is taking the game back to the seventies.  If this is the best that harrigan can come up with to improve the game then his time is up.
 
It's a professional sport Tookey. There are rules. If you can't play the ball properly or put the ball in the scrum why shouldn't you be penalised?
 
That one was a joke. Brett getting warned was also a joke. You could see the initial point of contact was the ball and his arm bounced up from there, whilst the player was going down toward the line.

there was so much wrong with that try that I can't believe it was awarded
 
It was the guy who took out Oldfield that should have been penalised. Uate or Nagaima turned him right around an put him off the chance to tackle. Very similar to when Hoppa was penalised.
 
The refs give way to many 'benefit of doubt' tries for mine.  If the doubt of a try is there, then just don't give it.  That seems more rational to me.
 
I wasn't surprised it was given, though thought it was dropped.

Re a penalty try - sure the arm bounced off the shoulder but they call that a penalty most of the time, and if in their opinion that caused the drop then I could see that justified.
 
ads link said:
I wasn't surprised it was given, though thought it was dropped.

Re a penalty try - sure the arm bounced off the shoulder but they call that a penalty most of the time, and if in their opinion that caused the drop then I could see that justified.

he dropped the ball well after he was hit. and point of contact was with the ball. That wouldn't have deserved a penalty at all
 
Dan link said:
[quote author=ads link=topic=187151.msg327970#msg327970 date=1301279605]
I wasn't surprised it was given, though thought it was dropped.

Re a penalty try - sure the arm bounced off the shoulder but they call that a penalty most of the time, and if in their opinion that caused the drop then I could see that justified.

he dropped the ball well after he was hit. and point of contact was with the ball. That wouldn't have deserved a penalty at all
[/quote]

I'll have to watch it again.... Either way good thing it didn't matter.
 
Fonz link said:
It's a professional sport Tookey. There are rules. If you can't play the ball properly or put the ball in the scrum why shouldn't you be penalised?



Fonz read the title of this thread.  The video ref doesn't adjudicate on play the ball or scrum infringements.  I am talking about the video ref and try decsions.

Anyway when was the last time you saw a ball put in the middle of a scrum and 2 hookers actually compete for it since the seventies?  

Do you want to have scrums like union?  Do you want to go back the stage where games are decided by penalties given from scrum infringements?  I don't.
 
I didn't mind the scrum infringements. I wouldn't mind seeing a contest in scrums again. As it is now you may as well have all the forward packs hold hands while the lock plays the ball to the half back.

Put some contest in it. Feeding to the second row isn't the end of the world, but feeding directly to the lock as mullen did is stretching it.

I do think that the enforcement of players staying bound is important.

Last year there were too many times where teams broke before the ball had cleared the scrum and were running pretty much in line with the opposition attack.

It cost us metres and possibly tries several times last year. So that I think is the main thing they need to enforce there Tookey
 
tookey link said:
  If this is the best that harrigan can come up with to improve the game then his time is up.

I had my doubts about harrigan and his massive ego but this years rule changes/interpretations have me believing that harrigan does possess rational judgement and while its not perfect he does seem capable of adjusting to a  more free flowing style of game. (yesterdays 2nd half excluded)   ;)
 
You need former players reffing cause these fools cant even get the basics right.Has Harrigan ever played the game at any level?
 
Dan link said:
I didn't mind the scrum infringements. I wouldn't mind seeing a contest in scrums again. As it is now you may as well have all the forward packs hold hands while the lock plays the ball to the half back.

Put some contest in it. Feeding to the second row isn't the end of the world, but feeding directly to the lock as mullen did is stretching it.

I do think that the enforcement of players staying bound is important.

Last year there were too many times where teams broke before the ball had cleared the scrum and were running pretty much in line with the opposition attack.

It cost us metres and possibly tries several times last year. So that I think is the main thing they need to enforce there Tookey

If both teams are doing the same thing at every scrum then it evens itself out.

One of the worst things is for a team to lose a vital game by a penalty goal as a result of a scrum infringement and that is why they let scrums deteriorate.

We wouldn't want to miss out on a semi final spot of lose a grand final due to a penalty from a scrum. 
 
Dan, you and I differ with scrums.  Go look at the mess produced in the 70s for contested scums.  Hopeless messes.  On the ABC Ryan was rambling on about if the lock picks the ball up from the scrum does that constitute an early break from the scrum?  Leave it as it is.  Front rowers should just lean in and the half put the ball in around the front rowers leg.  Scrums should be seen as they are, a reset of play and clearing the field of big slow guys.  I think one of the penalties against the Knights yesterday was for the half bauking with the ball (making out he was putting it in). That's a union scrum infringement.  
And while I'm at it.  I think that to get a free kick penalty when moving marginally while playing the ball is to harsh.  All the ref should do is tell the player to play the ball at the spot.  That would give the defensive team a little longer to reset.  Or if a penalty is blown, just a hand over would suffice.  This would also suffice to a player being 10 centimetres in front of a kicker when kicking off or a drop out.  Some penalties are way to harsh for some really minor infringements.          
 
tookey link said:
[quote author=Dan link=topic=187151.msg328001#msg328001 date=1301281793]
I didn't mind the scrum infringements. I wouldn't mind seeing a contest in scrums again. As it is now you may as well have all the forward packs hold hands while the lock plays the ball to the half back.

Put some contest in it. Feeding to the second row isn't the end of the world, but feeding directly to the lock as mullen did is stretching it.

I do think that the enforcement of players staying bound is important.

Last year there were too many times where teams broke before the ball had cleared the scrum and were running pretty much in line with the opposition attack.

It cost us metres and possibly tries several times last year. So that I think is the main thing they need to enforce there Tookey

If both teams are doing the same thing at every scrum then it evens itself out.

One of the worst things is for a team to lose a vital game by a penalty goal as a result of a scrum infringement and that is why they let scrums deteriorate.

We wouldn't want to miss out on a semi final spot of lose a grand final due to a penalty from a scrum. 
[/quote]

Didn't think you could kick for goal from a differential penalty?

Post  automatically merged: [time]1301285004[/time]

DSM5 link said:
Dan, you and I differ with scrums.  Go look at the mess produced in the 70s for contested scums.  Hopeless messes.  On the ABC Ryan was rambling on about if the lock picks the ball up from the scrum does that constitute an early break from the scrum?  Leave it as it is.  Front rowers should just lean in and the half put the ball in around the front rowers leg.  Scrums should be seen as they are, a reset of play and clearing the field of big slow guys.  I think one of the penalties against the Knights yesterday was for the half bauking with the ball (making out he was putting it in). That's a union scrum infringement. 
And while I'm at it.  I think that to get a free kick penalty when moving marginally while playing the ball is to harsh.  All the ref should do is tell the player to play the ball at the spot.  That would give the defensive team a little longer to reset.  Or if a penalty is blown, just a hand over would suffice.  This would also suffice to a player being 10 centimetres in front of a kicker when kicking off or a drop out.  Some penalties are way to harsh for some really minor infringements.         

I disagree - i've liked the changes so far. They might be minor infringements, but last season teams were taking up to a metre over in drop outs, and forwards didn't have their arms around each other in scrums. If they'd just kept on top of those with penalities occasionally then we never would have needed the crack down.

I actually think Harrigan is looking ok so far.
 
I reckon I'd be pushing to have seen 4 differential scrum penalties in the last 20/25 years,and now there's 4 in one game.Obviously the ref got a bit overzealous.Can't remember the last time I saw the ball put in the middle,and a decent contest.
 
There is a much cleaner look to the way the game flows from both the scrum and play-the-ball rules. A huge improvement from small things. So far the reffing this year is still miles better than 2010 (which is probably not hard as I rated it the worst in a decade). 

When Sandow hit Horo with his head and that is called legit I get worried. A dangerous effort that should have been penalised. There is certainly room for improvement but I'm reasonably happy.
 
tookey link said:
[quote author=Fonz link=topic=187151.msg327947#msg327947 date=1301277009]
It's a professional sport Tookey. There are rules. If you can't play the ball properly or put the ball in the scrum why shouldn't you be penalised?

????  

Fonz read the title of this thread.  The video ref doesn't adjudicate on play the ball or scrum infringements.  I am talking about the video ref and try decsions.

Anyway when was the last time you saw a ball put in the middle of a scrum and 2 hookers actually compete for it since the seventies?  

Do you want to have scrums like union?  Do you want to go back the stage where games are decided by penalties given from scrum infringements?  I don't.
[/quote]

Mate i was commenting on your second paragraph where you were talking about scrum penalties. It had nothing to do with the video ref so what are you on about?

ayjay007 link said:
I reckon I'd be pushing to have seen 4 differential scrum penalties in the last 20/25 years,and now there's 4 in one game.Obviously the ref got a bit overzealous.Can't remember the last time I saw the ball put in the middle,and a decent contest.

Don't know if overzealous is right mate. They've been told to crack down on it. The ref gives 1 penalty yeah? If the infringement is then repeated, isn't the ref obligated to penalise again? And again if needed?
 

Members online

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom