Video Ref

[Dan]

AFAIK there is no kick for goal from a differential. I didn't mind it. In particular breaking from scrums has been a joke. A few games last year players were clearly offside and the halfback came close to being tackles.

I am happy with the changes so far and this year feel there ha been less to whinge about to previous years

 

[ayjay007]

[quote author=tookey link=topic=187151.msg327996#msg327996 date=1301281459]
[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?

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?
[/quote]

I thought the sin-bin was for repeated infringements.I've got no probs with a crack-down,as long as there is consistency.Watch the next TV game (pay or free) and watch how many scrums have the same infringements,with no penalties blown.

 

[tookey]

[quote author=tookey link=topic=187151.msg327996#msg327996 date=1301281459]
[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?

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?
[/quote]

my mistake - bad day

 

[codewana]

I'm still a big fan of the notion that the referee makes a decision which can be challenged by the captain (maximum 3 challenges per game). Only if a challenge is declared can the referee make a decision.

Alternatively, if that idea doesn't do it for you, how about this: referee can only ask for the video referee to make a decision on specific events. E.g, ref doesn't know if the player was offside - video ref can only look at the offside (not the grounding, obstruction, etc).

Either way the game isn't slowed down as much.

 

[shawn.b]

I like the idea of the ref making a decision then referring it for blatant mistakes.

Means the ref relies on gut instinct/ first impression rather than giving them time to think about it & make a politically correct decision.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

I like the idea of the ref making a decision then referring it for blatant mistakes.

Means the ref relies on gut instinct/ first impression rather than giving them time to think about it & make a politically correct decision.

Aah the good old days!!

 

[Dan]

6 stoppages and questions plus waiting for video ref would slow things down to a crawl and ruin the flow of the game

 

[codewana]

6 stoppages and questions plus waiting for video ref would slow things down to a crawl and ruin the flow of the game

Reduce the number of challenges?

What about my alternative suggestion?

 

[Rex]

This try was deja vu all over again.  Last year Matai taken out, followed by that the ridiculous decision to award an eight point try against Lyon.

This year Oldfield clearly and significantly interfered with, Foran forced to fill Oldfield's gap, and the try directly scored through the gap Foran was forced to leave.  To top it off, a try awarded when there was clearly no downward pressure, and advice that it would have been awarded as a penalty try anyway!! when as Dan pointed out the first contact was on the ball.

The video ref should be sacked for not even examining the clear interference on Oldfield, and then sacked again for the incorrect decision on grounding, and then sacked a third time for the advised decision of penalty try anyway for what was simply a good tackle.

The big difference was that last year we wouldn't have come back from the adversity of video ref incompetency.

 

[Stevo]

Also Rex, if the ref said it would have been a penalty try anyway, why wasn't Stewart cited if the penalty was so bad it would have conceeded a penalty try?

 

[MadMarcus]

6 stoppages and questions plus waiting for video ref would slow things down to a crawl and ruin the flow of the game

6 stoppages for video ref decisions isn't unusual in today's game.

I would like to see a challenge system, maybe only 2 challenges each though and you can only ask for a review of a play that results in a try.  It works well in tennis.

The most frustrating thing about the current video ref system (apart from when they get it wrong) is when everyone at the ground appears to know what happened but the video ref insists on watching the same thing over and over again!

 

[ads]

Also Rex, if the ref said it would have been a penalty try anyway, why wasn't Stewart cited if the penalty was so bad it would have conceeded a penalty try?

I don't think that's the measure of a penalty try. I thought it was illegal play (regardless of whether that play requires judiciary action) that stopped a try being scored.

 

[jbb/james]

did anyone see the penalty against the broncos for not binding in the scrum. I dont know what they were to do, they were in the scrum for sure. Maybe there arms were in the wrong spot but the back row was bound for sure

 

[DSM5]

Yeah the comment re the penalty try was weird.  If the try was awarded, as it was, then why not give Drugcastle the penalty as well if Hayne thought it warranted it.  Obviously it wasn't and he let it go.  Snake's arm struck the guys back and as he fell was propelled up.  Snake let go and rolled off the player.  It clearly wasn't a penalty.  A Try maybe, as anything goes now when you cross the line.     

 

[Stevo]

[quote author=Fonz link=topic=187151.msg328301#msg328301 date=1301358169]
Also Rex, if the ref said it would have been a penalty try anyway, why wasn't Stewart cited if the penalty was so bad it would have conceeded a penalty try?

I don't think that's the measure of a penalty try. I thought it was illegal play (regardless of whether that play requires judiciary action) that stopped a try being scored.
[/quote]

But if the penalty is for a high shot that was so bad it made the attacker drop the ball should Stewart not have been cited? Stewart hit the ball and gave him a tiny tap on the chin. Taia dropped it and then grounded it with his hip. I must say i wasn't surprised to see it awarded though.

 

[Rex]

[quote author=Fonz link=topic=187151.msg328301#msg328301 date=1301358169]
Also Rex, if the ref said it would have been a penalty try anyway, why wasn't Stewart cited if the penalty was so bad it would have conceeded a penalty try?

I don't think that's the measure of a penalty try. I thought it was illegal play (regardless of whether that play requires judiciary action) that stopped a try being scored.
[/quote]
Your argument is academic at best.

Did you not see the clear obstruction of the defence before it got anywhere near being scored? Anything that happened after that should have been entirely irrelevant.

 

[Chip and Chase]

Also Rex, if the ref said it would have been a penalty try anyway, why wasn't Stewart cited if the penalty was so bad it would have conceeded a penalty try?

The illegal play that leads to a penalty try doesn't necessarily have to mean judiciary citation. In this case it was probably high contact, but not intentional, or reckless enough to warrant been put on report. It's like tackling someone without the ball to stop them scoring, it's illegal and would warrant a penalty try, but you're not going to go before the judiciary, or get suspended for it.

 

[ads]

[quote author=ads link=topic=187151.msg328314#msg328314 date=1301360125]
[quote author=Fonz link=topic=187151.msg328301#msg328301 date=1301358169]
Also Rex, if the ref said it would have been a penalty try anyway, why wasn't Stewart cited if the penalty was so bad it would have conceeded a penalty try?

I don't think that's the measure of a penalty try. I thought it was illegal play (regardless of whether that play requires judiciary action) that stopped a try being scored.
[/quote]
Your argument is academic at best.

Did you not see the clear obstruction of the defence before it got anywhere near being scored? Anything that happened after that should have been entirely irrelevant.
[/quote]

Your argument is pointless at best.

Did you not see that I was only commenting about the general rules of penalty tries in response to Fonz' comment not the actual play on the weekend. Anything that actuallly happened on the weekend should be entirely irrelevant.



(By the way I don't mean pointless in general, I just pointless in response to my comment.)

 

[Manly To Win!]

I was more annoyed about the try Wolfman had disallowed tbh