Video referee, no try

[meast]

Does anyone else think the VR should go back to showing how the game is to be restarted, just on seeing the no try for saints and the game restarted with a saints scrum due to roosters knocking on, in the past it used to show on the screen what the restart was.

Not sure when they stopped doing it but it would make it easier for both the viewers on TV and the spectators at the ground and stop any confusion.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, meast said:

Does anyone else think the VR should go back to showing how the game is to be restarted, just on seeing the no try for saints and the game restarted with a saints scrum due to roosters knocking on, in the past it used to show on the screen what the restart was.

Not sure when they stopped doing it but it would make it easier for both the viewers on TV and the spectators at the ground and stop any confusion.

Yeah it does feel like that has gone backward for no reason. 

[meast]

At least you had a reasonable Idea of why the try had been disallowed back then

[Wellsy4HullFC]

IIRC, it didn't actually tell you why they restarted it that way; only told you how to restart. As the entire crowd already can see how it's restarted, I don't see how it helps with confusion.

It would be far better if it just said "Roosters knock on" or something.

[meast]

Anything to tell the crowd what the try had been disallowed for and how and why the game is restarting the way it is.

How many at the WCC last night would have known that the last touch came off a rooster, so therefore a scrum to saints rather than a GLDO?

[BadlyOverdrawnBoy]

I think it would be better for the VR to check in reverse order, ie grounding first, then knock-ons, obstruction etc. It would add to the tension and excitement. When they don't go to check grounding you know it's no try.

[bobbruce]

3 minutes ago, BadlyOverdrawnBoy said:

I think it would be better for the VR to check in reverse order, ie grounding first, then knock-ons, obstruction etc. It would add to the tension and excitement. When they don't go to check grounding you know it's no try.

Surely if they do it that way and when they check It the player doesn’t ground the ball. Someone will suggest checking it from the  ptb to build the tension. 

[BadlyOverdrawnBoy]

No, the ref tells the VR what to check, as always.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

59 minutes ago, BadlyOverdrawnBoy said:

I think it would be better for the VR to check in reverse order, ie grounding first, then knock-ons, obstruction etc. It would add to the tension and excitement. When they don't go to check grounding you know it's no try.

That would slow the game right down.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 hour ago, meast said:

Anything to tell the crowd what the try had been disallowed for and how and why the game is restarting the way it is.

How many at the WCC last night would have known that the last touch came off a rooster, so therefore a scrum to saints rather than a GLDO?

Saying "NO TRY - Scrum attack" would not have made any difference. It still wouldn't have told you why Saints you the scrum, and half the time the crowd are left thinking "which one's the attacking team?"

The "how" isn't needed. You can see how it's restarted. It's the "why" it's restarting that way, which we have to check the referee's signal for, that the crowd would benefit from IMO.

[Whippet13]

1 hour ago, BadlyOverdrawnBoy said:

I think it would be better for the VR to check in reverse order, ie grounding first, then knock-ons, obstruction etc. It would add to the tension and excitement. When they don't go to check grounding you know it's no try.

You would have situations where it is clearly no-try at the grounding but the VR would then have to go back to check whether there was an error earlier in the play. I think that would be pretty dull viewing. It would also mean VR decisions take longer.

[Wiltshire Warrior Dragon]

I rarely get the chance to attend top flight RL matches, so I am not sure how much, and related to what, is said by the official announcer, but perhaps RL could take a leaf out of ice hockey's book in which the announcer tells the crowd the reason for each stoppage, except perhaps the very obvious things like icings.  All goal scorers and those getting assists are announced, as is the time of the goal.  Likewise, with penalties, the crowd is told the reason for the penalty, the player penalised, the duration of the penalty (if it needs to be fully served) and its start time.

In RL, for situations in which it is not necessarily clear why the game has restarted as it has, this could be a simple solution.  It just needs the ref to be able to speak to the announcer when appropriate.  I'm no techno-expert, but in this day and age that doesn't sound too difficult to me.