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
General Rugby Union
50:22 and more to be globally trialled by WR
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="Cruz_del_Sur" data-source="post: 1092072" data-attributes="member: 55747"><p>I think it is. The reason for which people talk about refereeing in rugby appears to be very different and that is quite relevant. </p><p>One example: i watch a footie (asoc) game in a pub. People with no skin in the game (to eliminate bias) watch a play and overwhelmingly agree on what the call should be and when they don't it is 99% of the times because they see different things. </p><p></p><p>Now for the counterpoint: I go to the pub to watch a rugby game. People from the teams playing and impartials watching. Most have played and have been watching rugby for at least 20 years. A play happens and ref makes a call. A newcomer to the sports asks us what was the call about. We all cant answer the question. </p><p>This happens to me every 2/3 games. </p><p></p><p>I know, this aint any scientifically gathered data and merely my experience. Anecdotal evidence if you will. But that does not happen to me in any other sport. Not in football, tennis, mma, basket, ice hockey, etc. </p><p>Maybe in F1? I wouldnt know, but i can see how adding machines that can reach over 350 kph complicates things. </p><p>Shouldnt happen in rugby. No need for it. </p><p></p><p>I can tell you one thing: it appears to be a tremendous turn off for people who are beginning to follow the sport. </p><p></p><p>Just another piece of anecdotal evidence: WR has on their official youtube channel Nigel Owens videos explaining particular calls in, lets call it important games. Do you see FIFA, ATP, NBA doing something similar? A professional ref (just retired) breaking down plays and explaining why the actual ref got it right or not? </p><p>And dont get me wrong, i understand WHY they do it. </p><p>When the complexity of the rules is deemed to be too much, you can tackle it one of two ways: educating players/staff/audience and/or making the rules simpler. WR's approach appears to focus on the former, heavily. Not sure that is the right way to address this.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cruz_del_Sur, post: 1092072, member: 55747"] I think it is. The reason for which people talk about refereeing in rugby appears to be very different and that is quite relevant. One example: i watch a footie (asoc) game in a pub. People with no skin in the game (to eliminate bias) watch a play and overwhelmingly agree on what the call should be and when they don't it is 99% of the times because they see different things. Now for the counterpoint: I go to the pub to watch a rugby game. People from the teams playing and impartials watching. Most have played and have been watching rugby for at least 20 years. A play happens and ref makes a call. A newcomer to the sports asks us what was the call about. We all cant answer the question. This happens to me every 2/3 games. I know, this aint any scientifically gathered data and merely my experience. Anecdotal evidence if you will. But that does not happen to me in any other sport. Not in football, tennis, mma, basket, ice hockey, etc. Maybe in F1? I wouldnt know, but i can see how adding machines that can reach over 350 kph complicates things. Shouldnt happen in rugby. No need for it. I can tell you one thing: it appears to be a tremendous turn off for people who are beginning to follow the sport. Just another piece of anecdotal evidence: WR has on their official youtube channel Nigel Owens videos explaining particular calls in, lets call it important games. Do you see FIFA, ATP, NBA doing something similar? A professional ref (just retired) breaking down plays and explaining why the actual ref got it right or not? And dont get me wrong, i understand WHY they do it. When the complexity of the rules is deemed to be too much, you can tackle it one of two ways: educating players/staff/audience and/or making the rules simpler. WR's approach appears to focus on the former, heavily. Not sure that is the right way to address this. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
50:22 and more to be globally trialled by WR
Top