Captains Challenge

[THE RED ROOSTER 895]

I am impresed with the captains challenge in operation in the NRL, I think it brings a new tactical dimension to the game. As with Cricket's DRS, the aim of the captain's challenge is to overturn the absolute howler of a decision not meant to be a speculative punt. It now seems NRL sides are reluctant to go to the Captains Challenge until late in the second half unless they are absolutely certain there on the butt end of the refs whistle. As it should be. One example being Gold Coast who having burned their Captains Challenge yesterday found they were on the wrong end of some bad calls. .

Now I know all Super League games are not televised but they are videotaped and its therefore possible to do. Equally if Super League restarts in the one stadium with 3 games at one venue a fixed camera position would allow this. It's time to think of ways how you can do this not and try to find reasons you can't and it makes more sense as an innovation than Club Call.

[Hela Wigmen 976]

Honestly wasn’t keen on the idea of it when it was announced. I was fearful, in a way. Referee’s are under far greater scrutiny in the NRL than they are here and the abuse they were copping from fans, coaches and players was getting worse, so the last thing I thought they needed was an option to allow players to object to decisions made by officials. 

However, I’ve been proven wrong and it’s worked quite well thus far. I wouldn’t rush to say we need it in Super League just yet, much like the ‘six again’ which I’m not convinced with just yet, but it’s certainly added an interesting dimension to the game in the NRL. 

[Dunbar 8,210]

I am not a fan to be honest.

There are just too many variables for it to be a way to get more accurate refereeing.  The fact that a challenge can only be issued when there is a break in play means some calls go unable to be challenged. Then if a team loses a challenge early they are unable to make a challenge on what may be a more obvious error later on (their fault I know but the accuracy falls away).

It just feels a little gimmicky to me and I haven't seen any challenges that have swung the game in any way... it just seems like point scoring and something to highlight that ref's are sometimes wrong. We all know this so why can't we just get on with the game and let the best team win.

Edited June 14 by Dunbar

[M j M 4,305]

1 hour ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

 It's time to think of ways how you can do this not and try to find reasons you can't and it makes more sense as an innovation than Club Call.

You can't get past the fact, as you note, of the requirement for the sort of multiple camera angles you will only get on a TV game. One fixed, or two fixed as at some clubs, just won't give the detail and coverage needed to make this effective - they will often just have to go with the referee's call making the system moot.

Sometimes reasons we can't are genuine reasons we can't.

[Wellsy4HullFC 4,020]

Not kept up much with any sport recently. What's three exact ruling for Captain's Challenge? It's something I've pushed for in the past (if it's the way I think it is).

[Damien 9,643]

For me it just feels like a gimmick for the sake of it. For some reason the game seems obsessed with continually changing things for the sake of it. The NRL in particular seems to always have its eye on copying American sports. How many years is it since there was no change to the rules or the addition of gimmicks like this?

[RL does what Sky says 2,293]

4 hours ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

Now I know all Super League games are not televised but they are videotaped and its therefore possible to do.

Possibly the difference is that tv cameras cover an incident from many various angles whereas would that always apply when just videoed ?  If a team benefit or not in one match by having the technology to give a correct decision then surely every team in every match should have exactly the same.

[Bleep1673 1,523]

4 hours ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

Now I know all Super League games are not televised but they are videotaped and its therefore possible to do.

We will ignore the spelling of impressed, but the above is just poor grammar. You suggest All Super League games are not televised, that is not true, some of them are, usually only two per week, but it is two more than your statement above suggests

[Dunbar 8,210]

Having a captains challenge at non TV games is impossible.  Forget the number of cameras at a game, it requires TV level instant replays and live production facilities to relay the action to a video ref.  The single or multiple fixed video units the Super League clubs have nowhere near this level of sophistication.

[ojx 2,248]

I like the challenge, it brings some extra drama and tactics to the game. I would even take it a step further and only use the video ref for captain challenges. Maybe let them have three challenges per game. If no challenge is made, the ref's decision stays. That would speed things up overall, and teams would be very careful with their challenges.

[DavidM 9,090]

Don’t like it , don’t want it . We need less VR not more . We can’t eradicate all errors, and some going to the VR are still judgement calls . Refs and touchies are already loathe to make decisions because of the VR’s overarching presence . The refs often manage the game and the VR makes the big decisions . I don’t like that , and the challenge is another layer ... and if it’s there it should be 2 looks max . Some have been long stoppages with loads of views from the VR . That can’t be right . One more thing I don’t like ... players staying down so the VR can look at something . Get up and it’s play on ... you’re encouraging players to stay down . There was a team , I forget which , who’s players stayed down holding their neck 5 times I counted - all in their own 20 . In general play the VR use is not consistent 

Edited June 14 by DavidM

[Man of Kent 6,433]

Don’t mind the NRL Captain’s Challenge. It provides an insurance against bad, game-changing decisions. 

[Oldbear 372]

While we only have 2-3 televised games per week there’s no way we can have a captains challenge, the requirement for clubs to video games is just that, whatever is necessary to fulfill a requirement. Captains challenge requires the use of TV quality pictures, with the variety of camera angles required to satisfy the entertainment industry. Having said that, and having seen captains challenge in action, I don’t want to see it in Super League anytime soon.

[Dunbar 8,210]

29 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Don’t mind the NRL Captain’s Challenge. It provides an insurance against bad, game-changing decisions. 

Only a sub set of the decisions though.

If you look at other sports with a challenge built in to the laws - tennis with a line call or cricket with an umpire decision for example - every call can be challenged because there is a natural break at the end of each pointor delivery.

But in the NRL version only a decision that results in a stoppage in play can be challenged.

So, for example, a knock that goes undetected in the play before a try is scored cannot be challenged.  It is this inconsistency that is one of the things I don't like.

I was thinking through the controversial 'six again' decision in last years Grand Final and wondering whether it would fall under the category of a challengable call... I don't think it would because it was a mix up in the ref's signal rather than an actual decision. 

[Man of Kent 6,433]

6 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Only a sub set of the decisions though.

If you look at other sports with a challenge built in to the laws - tennis with a line call or cricket with an umpire decision for example - every call can be challenged because there is a natural break at the end of each pointor delivery.

But in the NRL version only a decision that results in a stoppage in play can be challenged.

So, for example, a knock that goes undetected in the play before a try is scored cannot be challenged.  It is this inconsistency that is one of the things I don't like.

I was thinking through the controversial 'six again' decision in last years Grand Final and wondering whether it would fall under the category of a challengable call... I don't think it would because it was a mix up in the ref's signal rather than an actual decision. 

It’s not perfect but it works. 

I could see it coming in for the World Cup.

Had it been there in 2017 Tonga might have challenged Andrew Fifita’s loose carry/strip. Big call for the VR!

[whatmichaelsays 1,057]

I don't like it. We do enough to undermine confidence in match officials already in RL and stuff like this only throws more fuel on the fire. 

Make the job of the officials easier but don't do that by empowering players and coaches to challenge them. 

If anyone can't accept that match officials might make incorrect decisions from time to time then they need to find something else to do, because they clearly aren't mature enough for professional sport. 

[Harry Stottle 3,271]

Don't know if it is just me, the main law infringement that I still observe in the NRL is the 'forward' pass, more are being picked up it seems when the ball is passed from a play the ball more noticable it seems because one player is 'static', but in general play the amount of times I mumble to myself "Forward" seems quite a lot in every game, many games are won and lost on these decisions  and seemingly a lot of the defensive player's instinctively try to bring the ref's attention to it, not unlike we on the terraces and in the stands also do when we observe a forward instinctively we shout the word.

The pity is the ref is actually making a silent call to himself by judging that a pass is legal but these can't be challenged, I would say if we went back to the 'screen' to make a judgement on forward passes (especially with the multiple camera's in use these days) there would be more correct calls than the wrong ones judged by a single pair of eyes of the ref, I know someone is going to mention touchies but by the lack of calls - in my opinion - they don't get involved enough.

Anyway, on the Captains Challenge if it is upheld and the ref is deemed wrong, is it like in cricket that the challenge is not counted?

[Griff 269]

Folk already complain about the video ref only being used in televised games.

If the Captain's Challenge came over here, it'd just be something else to complain about.

On a wider scale, I'm not against it yet - the jury's still out for me.

[RL does what Sky says 2,293]

In a recent game the full back caught a kick on the full and the referee ruled his foot was just inside the in-goal area and so gave a 22m restart to the defending side.

However, the opposing captain challenged the decision and so it went to the video referee to judge. It showed the full back's foot was just touching the goal-line and therefore the referee was correct.

However, suppose the full back's foot had just been short of the line which would have normally been a play-on situation ? Having already stopped play, how would the game have restarted ?

It can't be a 22m tap as that would mean the defending side had gained an advantage due to the attacking team probably having tackled him before getting to that line - and also there would have been no point in having a captain's challenge if the same restart was to be given irrespective of how the matter was judged.

 

 

[Dunbar 8,210]

1 hour ago, RL does what Sky says said:

In a recent game the full back caught a kick on the full and the referee ruled his foot was just inside the in-goal area and so gave a 22m restart to the defending side.

However, the opposing captain challenged the decision and so it went to the video referee to judge. It showed the full back's foot was just touching the goal-line and therefore the referee was correct.

However, suppose the full back's foot had just been short of the line which would have normally been a play-on situation ? Having already stopped play, how would the game have restarted ?

It can't be a 22m tap as that would mean the defending side had gained an advantage due to the attacking team probably having tackled him before getting to that line - and also there would have been no point in having a captain's challenge if the same restart was to be given irrespective of how the matter was judged.

 

 

This is a very good point and if the challenge was successful then it would have been interesting to see how they would have restarted play.  In theory, the challenge is only used when the game is stopped but if the challenge was successful then it was play on and so the game hadn't stopped.

I would have liked to have seen that just for the answer.

[DavidM 9,090]

If it was last tackle the challenging team can’t get the ball back , and it can’t be a 20 restart as his foot wasn’t ingoal so it may have been a play the ball on the 10 to restart the game , but that’s an educated guess

[RL does what Sky says 2,293]

58 minutes ago, DavidM said:

If it was last tackle the challenging team can’t get the ball back , and it can’t be a 20 restart as his foot wasn’t ingoal so it may have been a play the ball on the 10 to restart the game , but that’s an educated guess

This didn't matter what tackle it was on as either it was a 20m restart  (for catching in-goal) or play on (for catching in the field-of-play).

Giving a 10m restart might give an advantage / disadvantage to one team or the other as the full back might have run 5m or 50m after catching the ball.

It appears obvious that this and other such incidents which could occur were never thought about by the authorities before they brought in the rule.

ie A player attempts a drop-goal from which the ball passes near the post and bounces in the in-goal area whereupon a defender picks it up and runs upfield. The referee gives a goal but the opposing captain challenges the decision. It is judged not to have been a goal - how does play restart ?

Altermatively, the same incident but the referee does NOT give a goal and play continues. The captain of the kicking side thinks it was a goal yet the new ruling says that challenges are not permitted if the referee allows play to continue.

It therefore appears unfair that one captain is able to challenge a decision but the other captain is not for the same incident.

Therefore, in my opinion it should be scrapped - or at least not brought into the British game - until all these matters have been correctly thought about.