Post subject: Video refs again - is there any point any more?
Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 2:21 am
Ferocious Aardvark
International Chairman
Joined: Feb 17 2002 Posts: 28357 Location: MACS0647-JD
So last night it was Bentham's turn, and VReffing gets no better.
Dodgy decision 1 - when is a "lost ball" a try, and when is it not a try? last week Gardner plainly loses contact with the ball but a try is given. This week the player so very clearly keeps contact with the ball and touches it down - yet no try is given.
Dodgy decision 2 - when is a knock on not a knock on? A while back, Semi Tadulala scooped a ball directly back over his head, behind him, yet it was given as a knock on on the spurious grounds that it still had some forward momentum. yet last night a ball is so plainly knocked literally yards forward, but the VR (according to Eddie) ruled it went backwards.
The system, or the people tasked to run it, seems beyond salvage. There is no point to this - if we can't find anyone competent to view a screen, we should scrap it.
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total
Joined: Dec 22 2001 Posts: 27757 Location: In rocket surgery
There's nothing wrong with the system of video refereeing. It's the individual who has made the decision that's wrong. Those two decisions last night have to rank as two of the worst that I've ever seen. You can forgive close calls, howver neither of those two Harlequins RL decisions were that. Both were clear cut calls.
PIE&PROUD wrote:I think Bentham realised that he made a mistake giving the first try and scrubbed off the second to make amends as they were both blatent
Nah I think the evener was not going to the screen for Bailys try.
[quote='Fishsta"']I've always thought of McGuire as a good player, and I wouldn't normally wish injury on any player, but there was a certain hint of poetic justice to that.
[/quote]
Another classic:
[quote='Fishsta']You forgot to take off the "Saints Reduction Factor" when calculating the ban.
Standard suspension / Saints Reduction Factor = Actual ban for Saints player.
Therefore (2 / 3) = 0.666
0.666 < 1 therefore actual ban equals "less than 1 match".
Joined: May 31 2005 Posts: 4064 Location: An exclusive mansion apartment in fashionable South London
I feel the biggest problem is that the replays are slowed down so much, freeze framed, run forwards then backwards again, shown from another angle, then the first angle again, practically every decision that gets referred ends up looking dubious.
For the disallowed Sharp try yesterday the touch judge was about five yards away and was practically obscuring the camera's view from one angle - if he can't be trusted to call that he might as well not be there. On another decision that was referred the in goal judge was right on the spot and would have had an unobstructed view. If we must have the referral system I feel all replays should be shown at real speed and if they're doubtful the try is given. The first Quins try yesterday was unbelievable - Dorn(?) clearly touched the ball forward before a defender knocked it right back into the in goal area for Randall to score.
Joined: Aug 06 2003 Posts: 5952 Location: Edinburgh
On a slightly different topic, I think the French ref would have got the decision right if he hadn't referred them. I thought he had a very very good game, and he looks to be one of the better refs around at the moment.
Joined: Jan 27 2005 Posts: 1523 Location: Not far from t'Jungle
Dave T wrote:On a slightly different topic, I think the French ref would have got the decision right if he hadn't referred them. I thought he had a very very good game, and he looks to be one of the better refs around at the moment.
I'd agree with that assertion.
There are a few new refs knocking about in SL and they seem to mostly be doing a better job than the likes of Ganson, Klein et al.
Joined: Jul 31 2003 Posts: 36786 Location: Leafy Worcester, home of the Black Pear
Dave T wrote:On a slightly different topic, I think the French ref would have got the decision right if he hadn't referred them. I thought he had a very very good game, and he looks to be one of the better refs around at the moment.
Apart from missing Bailey's blatant double movement you mean?
Hold on to me baby, his bony hands will do you no harm It said in the cards, we lost our souls to the Nameless One
PIE&PROUD wrote:I think Bentham realised that he made a mistake giving the first try and scrubbed off the second to make amends as they were both blatent
I thought Sky were saying it was Ben Thaler not Bentham?
Dorn knocked on. It just doesn't get any clearer than that. An unfathomable and inexcusable call from the video ref.
Sharpe touched down with his little finger and it was enough.
Bailey's appeared a double movement and his action in promoting the ball would suggest he did too. Poor refereeing by Alibert not referring it but perhaps he had lost confidence in the man upstairs by this point.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 172 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum