McClennan wrote: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.
This is exactly my point.
I reckon it's now clear that, however good and knowledgable a referee you may be on the field, the RFL hasn't catered for the possibility that a ref may be a technologcal halfwit, or a person whose brain just isn't wired to look at a 2D image and be able to work out 3D angles properly.
I often wonder about this when the VR is asked to check if someone was onside. Once the frame freezes, you have to make allowance for parallax as the lines on the pitch diverge towards the camera, but usually, to me, it's immediately blindingly obvious. Yet some of these guys seem to take an age, and start looking from all sorts of angles and repeat several times, and this might just be because their brains just aren't able to do the maths.
At least, that sort of theory could explain the "no knock on" ruling. How you either explain the no-try ruling - or more to the point, try to reconcile it with other calls made in similar circumstances, or the rules, is a bigger problem.
