S
smartcooky
Guest
Please vote in this poll. The more responses we get the better.
....
(oh, by the way cooky, congrats on the poll this week ) [/b]
Voted for all but one:
Have TWO referees -> Obviously not to check on the same things, but rather to spread the load. Most refs tend to miss things (like offside for example), simply because they can't both be looking at what's going on in the ruck and down the field at the same time. It's physically impossible. Having an extra official, that wouldn't have to be on the field necessarily, could free up certain burdens from the main ref, like offside and whatnot. They wouldn't intefere with each other, as the don't rule on the same things. The assistant ref could give the main ref a signal if he spots a foul, and the main ref can then decide to penalize that, or penalize another foul he has seen, or play advantage.
. [/b]
<div class='quotemain'> Voted for all but one:
Have TWO referees -> Obviously not to check on the same things, but rather to spread the load. Most refs tend to miss things (like offside for example), simply because they can't both be looking at what's going on in the ruck and down the field at the same time. It's physically impossible. Having an extra official, that wouldn't have to be on the field necessarily, could free up certain burdens from the main ref, like offside and whatnot. They wouldn't intefere with each other, as the don't rule on the same things. The assistant ref could give the main ref a signal if he spots a foul, and the main ref can then decide to penalize that, or penalize another foul he has seen, or play advantage.
. [/b]