Video refs at non TV games?

Discussion in 'Super League / Northern Hemisphere' started by St Helens RLFC, Sep 4, 2008.

  1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/7596426.stm


    RFL trials replays at non-TV game


    The use of a video referee will be trialled at a non-televised match this weekend for the first time.

    At present, only matches screened live have replays but cameras will cover the Hull KR v Hull derby on Sunday.

    There have been regular calls for a video referee to be available at all games in the interests of fairness.

    "We will review the success before deciding whether it is practical to introduce it full-time," said the Rugby Football League's Stuart Cummings.

    "For supporters in the crowd it will be like a TV game but without the big screen broadcasting the decision and is similar to what we already do in France for televised Catalans Dragons games."

    The only two non-televised Super League matches to have had video referees were at this year's Millennium Magic weekend event in Cardiff.

    A normal live television match is covered by 12 cameras but Sunday's trial will feature three - one on the gantry at halfway and one behind each goal.

    St Helens coach Daniel Anderson called for the widespread use of replays after his side lost to Huddersfield back in March, while Hull KR coach Justin Morgan joined the debate after the 24-18 Challenge Cup quarter-final defeat by eventual winners St Helens in June.

    Rovers had two tries disallowed in the first half that might have been given if the match had been televised, as two of the four ties that weekend were. "I will live with the decisions but it was a good advert for video referees at all games," said Morgan after the game.





    Well, it's about time I have to say. There are some scanadlous decisions given at none televised games (almost always involving Ian Smith) and this will hopefully put a stop to some of the moaning that you get. I think it's a great idea personally, I'm all for it.
     
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. It should be apart of the game all the time not just a gimmick of sky sports. <_<

    Good to see the Super League catching up to the NRL. :p
     
  4. Well unfortunately, the NRL says "jump" and the Super League says "how high?"

    (Playoffs, turtling, grapple tackles.....)
     
  5. DonBilly

    DonBilly Guest

    It is fair. This means that you can expect the same level of refereeing.

    Furthermore this doesn"t cost that much since TV cameras are already there to prepare the summaries that are played later on durint the Boot'n all magazine. So this basically requires appointing a video ref with the required monitor and video devices to play and replay.
     
  6. alexrugby

    alexrugby Guest

    I think the number of rugby TV Refs is directly proportional to the Highest Possible true Ref decisions.
    There are some tournaments where TV Refs aren't taking part and it is reflected on the match quality.

    Rugby stands one head above the football where refs spoil too many things with their stupid decisions.
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Vambo

    Vambo Guest

    Great... we can look forward to even more good tries ruled out because of a non-existent 'Obstruction' :rolleyes:
    I bet the crowd love waiting for a decision with no big screen to show them what the hell the video ref is looking at.

    For me the video ref is way overused by refs who seem to be more and more reliant on them.
     
  8. I'd rather the referee use the screen personally. It's there, they may as well use it.
     
  9. Vambo

    Vambo Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (St Helens RLFC @ Sep 4 2008, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Won't be long before every try is referred to the video ref as a matter of course... in fact I'm convinced that is already the case in some games the number of times it is used.
     
  10. alexrugby

    alexrugby Guest

    Yeah! I understand yours Vambo but think again what when you beat opposer team with amazing goal and Brick referee doesn't count that :ranting:

    I think all the rugby world must work hard to improve the video Referee workload and level of course.

    I didn't want to put led on your wound when putting the above picture in my post, as just this was one of the brightest example of what may happen with Video Refs, thats OK Vambo?

    Otherwise I welcome TV Referee job, as they solve too many problems and especially in rugby when the ball is frequently beyond the vision of not only Refs but also of players.

    [​IMG]

    And also I really wanted for England's try to be scored as the match would be more dynamic and interesting then, and not that gloomy as it was in reality.

    [​IMG]
     
  11. I'd sooner use 2 referees and get it right than use one and get it wrong.
     
  12. alexrugby

    alexrugby Guest

    I agree St Helens RLFC, DAMN I AGREE

    Priority is the quality and not number

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Vambo

    Vambo Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LeksoRugby @ Sep 5 2008, 03:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Hi,

    The Cueto no try was a perfect example of why the technology of the video ref is a good thing. My problem with video refs is more to do with their use in Superleague... this season we have had very good examples of video refs giving the wrong decision and even the refs boss came out and apologised to Bradford after they had two good tries chalked off incorrectly by the video ref.
    I also hate the fact that a ref will go back ages in play and check for stuff like how the ball came lose, was anyone offside and was the ball grounded correctly whilst often ignoring a blatently obvious forward pass that everyone in the stadium bar the match officials witnessed, It makes a mockery of the whole thing to see tries given despite a pass that was miles forward and yet an invisible to the naked eye 'obstruction' that had no affect on the defender will mean a try being denied.
    There was a try awarded by the video ref last night despite no actual evidence that the ball was grounded.
     
  14. They can only go back one tackle for anything like a knock on.
     
  15. Vambo

    Vambo Guest

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (St Helens RLFC @ Sep 6 2008, 12:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
    Yes but the ball can go through many pairs of hands after that before a try is scored.
     
  16. alexrugby

    alexrugby Guest

    Sue that's tha annoying thing when you score try and some brickhead gives off your work.

    I think such negative moments must trigger more heistated workshop on TV Referee quialification notes.
     
  17. Vambo

    Vambo Guest

    Yet more weird video ref decisions in the last couple of days... how the hell one of Salfords tries got disallowed I will never know and Bradford won't be best pleased neither.

    What is the point of going to the video ref if the decision he makes are so obviously wrong?

    I really would rather we didn't have them and wouldn much rather accept a bad call from the pitch officials than from someone who looks at the video for ages and then gives the wrong call.
     
  18. You have to make some concessions though Vambo - not all referees are as utterly clueless as Phil Bentham!
     
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page