Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
The Rugby Championship 2023
22 October 2016 v Australia, Eden Park, Auckland
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RoosTah" data-source="post: 820869" data-attributes="member: 12207"><p>I used to think that, but after years of watching League and Union at a variety of levels it's become clear to me that the video referees are far from perfect and make A LOT of poor and even flat out wrong decisions. Even the way the technology is used is inconsistent and frankly stupid - the idea the video referee can interrupt up until a conversion is taken but not after it is frankly silly and largely dependant on where the try is scored - there's little rhyme or reason to it if the goal is supposedly accuracy. </p><p></p><p>This is something that the NRL highlighted unintentionally this year with the bunker - a video referral system light years ahead of what Union uses. What we ended up with was the flow of the game being destroyed for often pedantic technical calls that had zero effect on the play, highly contentious frame by frame calls where tries being awarded or not can't really be said to definitively be right or wrong (league has less grey areas than union, but they're still there) and on-field referees just no longer trusting their judgement at all and becoming lazy.</p><p></p><p>The exact same thing happened in the NFL several years ago, and they now use a coach's challenge for the same reason.</p><p></p><p>Essentially the over use of tech just results in the spectacle and joy of the game being undermined through analysis paralysis and makes the focus entirely on what the referee got right or wrong. It might work for technocrats of the game like yourself SC, but for a lot of fans the fact that the video referees still make mistakes just makes the whole thing irritating and seem pointless. </p><p></p><p>What a captain's challenge does is directs the fan's indignation more at the teams themselves, as they have to think tactically about if they want to risk losing a challenge over a call they don't like. </p><p></p><p>It just makes so much more sense than the plodding, spectacle sapping and inconsistent way we do it now. It's also just more efficient on a number of levels too. Think about it - if a player knows he's dropped the ball, but it's unclear on first viewing and the ref just says no-try, then the attacking team is just going to cop it and move on rather than the system we have now where the unsure ref will send it to the box for 30 camera angles and a frame by frame break down.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RoosTah, post: 820869, member: 12207"] I used to think that, but after years of watching League and Union at a variety of levels it's become clear to me that the video referees are far from perfect and make A LOT of poor and even flat out wrong decisions. Even the way the technology is used is inconsistent and frankly stupid - the idea the video referee can interrupt up until a conversion is taken but not after it is frankly silly and largely dependant on where the try is scored - there's little rhyme or reason to it if the goal is supposedly accuracy. This is something that the NRL highlighted unintentionally this year with the bunker - a video referral system light years ahead of what Union uses. What we ended up with was the flow of the game being destroyed for often pedantic technical calls that had zero effect on the play, highly contentious frame by frame calls where tries being awarded or not can't really be said to definitively be right or wrong (league has less grey areas than union, but they're still there) and on-field referees just no longer trusting their judgement at all and becoming lazy. The exact same thing happened in the NFL several years ago, and they now use a coach's challenge for the same reason. Essentially the over use of tech just results in the spectacle and joy of the game being undermined through analysis paralysis and makes the focus entirely on what the referee got right or wrong. It might work for technocrats of the game like yourself SC, but for a lot of fans the fact that the video referees still make mistakes just makes the whole thing irritating and seem pointless. What a captain's challenge does is directs the fan's indignation more at the teams themselves, as they have to think tactically about if they want to risk losing a challenge over a call they don't like. It just makes so much more sense than the plodding, spectacle sapping and inconsistent way we do it now. It's also just more efficient on a number of levels too. Think about it - if a player knows he's dropped the ball, but it's unclear on first viewing and the ref just says no-try, then the attacking team is just going to cop it and move on rather than the system we have now where the unsure ref will send it to the box for 30 camera angles and a frame by frame break down. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
The Rugby Championship 2023
22 October 2016 v Australia, Eden Park, Auckland
Top