2 Refs in SL for 2019.

[yipyee]

2 hours ago, bobbruce said:

What worries me is the purpose of the second ref in the NRL is to tidy up the ptb not speed it up. There are plenty of occasions when the second ref stops play and makes the attacker ptb from the right spot. 

Well they shouldn't step off the mark then... sick of penaltys for not being square when in fact the PTB player has stepped of the mark

[Wiltshire Warrior Dragon]

27 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I hear you but ultimately if we want Super League to be more intense and England to be more competitive against Australia then we have to keep up with the NRL.

Reduced interchanges and shot clocks will help that too.

I heard Luke Gale say the other day that during one of Wayne Bennett’s first coaching sessions during the Four Nations that a hungover James Graham won the bleep test. A pi$$ed prop!

I am intrigued, MoK.

I never really understand what the adjective 'intense' means when used in this way and in this context.  I would have thought that a technically mediocre game between two, low ranked, amateur sides could be just as 'intense' as an SL clash, but maybe I am wrong.

Could you define what you mean by 'intense', please?  Thanks. 

 

[Marauder]

3 hours ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

A couple of points:

1. We have about six full-time referees at present.

2. Do we have enough referees of a sufficient quality to make this work?

It was stated on Rugby AM the other week that we've got 8 full-time refs.

[Man of Kent]

3 minutes ago, Wiltshire Warrior Dragon said:

I am intrigued, MoK.

I never really understand what the adjective 'intense' means when used in this way and in this context.  I would have thought that a technically mediocre game between two, low ranked, amateur sides could be just as 'intense' as an SL clash, but maybe I am wrong.

Could you define what you mean by 'intense', please?  Thanks. 

 

By intense I mean a combination of team effort, energy, execution under pressure, commitment, speed, physicality. Giving your all for the full 80 etc.

The recent Warrington-Saints and Wigan-Saints games, for example, were what I regard as high intensity.

Huddersfield-Wigan last Thursday, on the other hand, was the opposite. 

There may be good reasons why some games are more intense than others, but we know it when we see it.

[bobbruce]

18 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Well they shouldn't step off the mark then... sick of penaltys for not being square when in fact the PTB player has stepped of the mark

That’s my point offences at the Ptb should be punished no matter who’s committing them. My worry is if we are bringing it in to speed up the ptb the chances are the defending side will be the one getting hammered. 

[Oliver Clothesoff]

45 minutes ago, Marauder said:

It was stated on Rugby AM the other week that we've got 8 full-time refs.

Twelve teams in Super League, six games a week, two refs a game = 12 refs. We have eight. 

Its a non-starter. 

[17 stone giant]

The crowd could become the official second ref. With fans in all four sides of the stadium, they should be able to see any infringements. They can then shout out to alert the referee. It's a fool proof system.

[deluded pom?]

Of course we can afford extra full time refs. Simply reduce any monies allocated to teams outside of SL to pay their salaries. Job done.

[Mr Plow]

9 hours ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

All games won’t though. It’s financially not viable. 

Exactly, so where are you going to find a 2nd referee?

[JohnM]

Apparently, the second referee will be chosen from the ranks of TRL forum posters as there are so many such specialists on here.

[Dunbar]

Like others, I am confused about the line saying this will speed up the play. Enforcing a proper play the ball will slow down the ruck a little but this is a good thing in my opinion as it is a crazy sloppy at the moment.

Anyway, what is tis obsession with the speed of the play being the key to entertainment. It is plenty fast enough at the moment... frantic even. More skillful plays will come from slowing it down a little

And I mean the actual play.... I think there is merit in reducing the time taken at stoppages (scrums, dropouts etc) as these things give the impression of a slower game.

[Man of Kent]

9 hours ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Twelve teams in Super League, six games a week, two refs a game = 12 refs. We have eight. 

Its a non-starter. 

Not if they go with a ref and a pocket ref, who has ‘one job’, ie to police the ruck.

Think of it more as ‘ruck judge’ than a full blown second ref

[Chronicler of Chiswick]

More slavishly following anything that Australia does without thinking it through. Watching the NRL on Sky, I don't see a great deal of difference from SL, plus we haven't enough officials now so, as has already been pointed out, where are we going to find another 6? As far as I'm concerned, I'd just get rid of the video ref and have the two in-goal officials, although we seem to mange OK in L1 with the old fashioned one ref and two touch judge system.

[del capo]

2 minutes ago, Chronicler of Chiswick said:

More slavishly following anything that Australia does without thinking it through. Watching the NRL on Sky, I don't see a great deal of difference from SL, plus we haven't enough officials now so, as has already been pointed out, where are we going to find another 6? As far as I'm concerned, I'd just get rid of the video ref and have the two in-goal officials, although we seem to mange OK in L1 with the old fashioned one ref and two touch judge system.

 The RFL Council 3 years ago were presented with a seasons match statistics indicating our rucks were in fact quicker than theirs ( they had done a similar exercise ) Have we really got slower or them quicker since then? That said we are definately messier , but that's down to our coaches and the man in the middle...

[CmonTheBorough]

Am I hallucinating again or did Steve Ganson say on the Backchat TV programme that they had been studying the Australian two-ref system, didn't think it was any good and wouldn't be adopting it?

[Oliver Clothesoff]

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

Not if they go with a ref and a pocket ref, who has ‘one job’, ie to police the ruck.

Think of it more as ‘ruck judge’ than a full blown second ref

But we have eight fully professional refs, it’s simply not enough. Plus at least three , maybe four games a week will require in goal officials. 

We simply don’t have the numbers to do this and we simply don’t, as a game, have the finances to sustain video referees at every Super League game. 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

7 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

But we have eight fully professional refs, it’s simply not enough. Plus at least three , maybe four games a week will require in goal officials. 

We simply don’t have the numbers to do this and we simply don’t, as a game, have the finances to sustain video referees at every Super League game. 

God forbid a referee might ref on a Thursday and then again on a Sunday.......

[Oliver Clothesoff]

10 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

God forbid a referee might ref on a Thursday and then again on a Sunday.......

That’ll end well...

[Pigeon Lofter]

Awarding the current penalty for PTB infractions can be seen as unnecessarily harsh....magnified when it results in another set of six or a pot at goal (Leeds v Salford recently showing how a single controversial call might impact a clubs future!).

A better outcome might be to add one or two tackles to the count to compensate for the infraction,but not six or a shot at goal. The punishment should fit the crime....as the laws stand,it doesn't.

The referee should also just order a replay of a PTB if it's taken from a spot inches away from where it should be...not a penalty or a scrum. That's over harsh and unfair as it stands.

And loose carries or dropped balls should be called for what they are.....failure to maintain possession and not a free penalty for incompetent play.

Clean up this part of the game.....and have the ball heeled backwards every time...and the quality of game will improve exponentially for players and spectators alike.

 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

6 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

That’ll end well...

I think you just don't like the idea of two refs -  perceived lack of refs shouldn't be a blocker for this. 

[Oliver Clothesoff]

Just now, hunsletgreenandgold said:

I think you just don't like the idea of two refs -  perceived lack of refs shouldn't be a blocker for this. 

I don’t mind the idea of two refs, I see both negatives and positives with it. I just think we don’t have the numbers to make it viable. If you haven’t got the numbers, it’s a non-starter. 

[DavidM]

9 minutes ago, Pigeon Lofter said:

Awarding the current penalty for PTB infractions can be seen as unnecessarily harsh....magnified when it results in another set of six or a pot at goal (Leeds v Salford recently showing how a single controversial call might impact a clubs future!).

A better outcome might be to add one or two tackles to the count to compensate for the infraction,but not six or a shot at goal. The punishment should fit the crime....as the laws stand,it doesn't.

The referee should also just order a replay of a PTB if it's taken from a spot inches away from where it should be...not a penalty or a scrum. That's over harsh and unfair as it stands.

And loose carries or dropped balls should be called for what they are.....failure to maintain possession and not a free penalty for incompetent play.

Clean up this part of the game.....and have the ball heeled backwards every time...and the quality of game will improve exponentially for players and spectators alike.

 

You’d think if this 2 ref system came in then playing the ball with the foot and playing it on the mark would have to come in with it if we are mirroring the NRL . These are part of the pocket refs duties . I couldn’t agree with you more on losing possession . Responsibility must be put back on the ball carrier . It seems now in the ruck there’s a mindset that often the attacking team can do no wrong 

[chris26]

I was sure that “rucks” were banned in RL in the early 1900’s. What we need are the rules applied at PLB’s. No attacking players flopping on the man with the ball.

some of our jokingly called PLB’s take longer to get the ball back in play than some Union rucks ( they are still legal )

[Clogiron]

I have never understood why  the touch judge's can't control the 10 meters as per. Linesmen in soccer thus freeing up the ref to police the PTB, seems simple enough, no need for a second ref and probably a straighter, no creeping offside defensive line.

[Big Picture]

15 hours ago, Lowdesert said:

The LRL website.  

“Two referees in Super League in 2019

Super League are set to follow in the steps of the NRL and have two referees on-field next from 2019 and beyond.

The main referee will control the play from within the 10-metre zone and the other will monitor the play-the-ball, with the aim of introducing another referee to speed up the ruck and make the game more exciting. It is expected that it will be trialled for next season and then a decision will be made to see whether it stays at the end of 2019.”

Speed up the ruck?  WTF??  Do they want the game to move so quickly that defenses can never get set and offenses can make even more easy metres without needing to display any skill?  How boring would that be?