Maybe we should have signed a sponsorship deal with a company who could have provided the technology rather than the trucks?

but can we not still do this we are not tied in to one deal why not talk to a company to do it and use their name has sponsors they make money with the name splashed every game and on the trucks and we save money win win all round

That would be Sky then better get on the phone to them and see if they are interested

As good as the thought is - I just can't see happening. Hell, money aside - we'd struggle to even get enough competent officials adjudicating the decisions at all games.

The best proposal I can think of is, clubs using their own cameras/equipment to 'help' officials make a decision. As an example, we're obviously going to have camera crews at our games for hullkr.tv. If there was some way that a replay of a try could be viewed on a monitor by the match official with no/little time lost, then that could work. But, the biggest problem with this concept would be in the integrity of the host club's chosen camera team.

when the original trial took place it was costed at about £300,000 for the season and it was taken to the clubs who themselves decided that in the current financial climate that they didn't want the expense. The trial itself was successful and showed it could be done and work. It was down to the clubs to decide and no matter how much complaining Tony Smith does he knows this.

He also knows that a touch judge cannot chalk a try off. The job of the TJ is purely and simply to judge touch and goal kicks and "Advise" the ref nothing more than that.

If the RFL could get a deal with a production company to provide the equipment and crew, they could possibly recoup their money back via sponsorship with them as well as commission on better quality DVDs sold and possible sponsorship on internet highlights/replays (such as HullFC.tv, HullKR.tv, etc).

The front of the referees' shirts are still not sponsored either.

I like this idea lets tell the rfl

[quote="Wellsy13"]Not sure it would be as much as that. That's £6.5m a season. The report says it would cost a six-figure sum each season. £6.5m is a pretty large seven-figure sum.

The largest six-figure sum would leave us at around £7.5k a game.[/quote]

£50k x 13 home games is £650K not £6.5M

Did he mean six-figure number per club or altogether?

I went with £50k x 5 games x 26 rounds = £6.5m per season.

5 games rather than 7 because 2 are already covered by Sky, and 26 rounds rather than 27 because Magic Weekend is televised.

It would have been all together. The clubs wouldnt pay for the video refs, so why would he give the cost per club....i'm with you Wellsy