Captain's Challenge

[marklaspalmas]

Absolute rubbish.

Utter waste of time.

Adds nothing whatsoever to the sport.

[gingerjon]

I'm going to need to review this post.

Can I have your best angle please?

Your best angle.

Your best ... ah, never mind ... yeah, whatevs is my decision.

(Honestly, it's absolute parp.)

[The One]

It’s just used by the defence to have a rest 

[Jughead]

Not a fan. Find it funny when it doesn’t work, too. 

[marklaspalmas]

There's just no reason for it.

The decisions of Luai of Samoa and Kikau of Fiji were so damned bizarre, you wonder if those two team-mates were having some kind of private joke with their calls. 

[north yorks trinity]

I love it!!!

One incorrect challenge per game doesn't really interfere with the flow of the game and I can't see a problem with a correct challenge.

I know it didn't affect the result but Jamaica successfully challenged two absolute howlers in their match against Ireland - not sure how the ref and TJ between them got them so badly wrong in all honesty.

I'd like to see it introduced in televised SL games. Don't believe anyone who says it will disadvantage smaller teams (like Wakey) who appear less on TV. Sure, the smaller teams may experience more wrong decisions, but on the law of averages, 50% will go in their favour.

How about using captain's challenge to replace the routine use of the video ref? Maybe 1 challenge per match regarding try/no try decisions and 1 in general play? 

[yipyee]

Like the idea as a concept but would prefer it to be coaches challenge

[Niels]

I think anything that can correct a wrong decision has to be good.

It's also entertaining for fans. 

 

[RayCee]

It's made me realise that players have a blinkered view of decisions that go against them. Mind you it probably confirmed it rather than make me realise anything. 

[Dave T]

8 hours ago, Niels said:

I think anything that can correct a wrong decision has to be good.

It's also entertaining for fans. 

 

I don't know if it was due to technical. Issues, but at Newcastle of Saturday, it wasn't clear what was happening on the captains challenge. I had to explain to the newer fans round me who asked why they'd stopped. 

I noticed at the Scotland game yesterday they announced it and flashed it up on the screen. 

[Just Browny]

This was my view on Saturday. The Fiji and Samoa challenges were embarrassing.

Yesterday, the ref have two shocking decisions (both of which happened to be in front of where I was standing) and Jamaica overturned both of them. So I'm a bit more convinced now.

[sentoffagain2]

9 hours ago, yipyee said:

Like the idea as a concept but would prefer it to be coaches challenge

  That's how it works in the NFL,the coach throws a red duster down.And as there are about 8 officials at least one will see it.

[V02]

1 hour ago, Just Browny said:

This was my view on Saturday. The Fiji and Samoa challenges were embarrassing.

Yesterday, the ref have two shocking decisions (both of which happened to be in front of where I was standing) and Jamaica overturned both of them. So I'm a bit more convinced now.

I like the concept generally but think it feels more clunky than in the NRL. Maybe it's a matter of familiarity. I reckon also the bunker in the NRL means they actually get resolved quickly enough to not be annoying, here so far they seem to take too long.

[Mattrhino]

I thought it was awful, hope they don't bring it to SL

[Alan Robertson]

If teams use the challenge appropriately, it should largely prevent them (plus the coaches and fans) from complaining about the officiating.

If the challenge is used when the referee has made 'a howler', it should be successful and the team will get to use it again if another howler is made (and repeat the process as many times as necessary). 

Used speculatively, it's a waste of everybody's time.

I like it. Players using it at the 'wrong time' doesn't make it a bad concept. It means they've, er, used it at the wrong time.

 

[georgeb1]

I would rather see more time invested in improving Reffing standards , this only undermines their authority and deflates confidence.

[DavidM]

Not a fan , another stoppage in a game and another intrusion of the VR into the game . But … if we’re going to have it ( and the VR in general ) we need to back it with the best technology and it needs to be quick . In the NRL ( with the finances ) everything is behind it , but unfortunately here its a bit second rate so it takes an interminable length of time to do anything , the cameras aren’t as good and the VR and match director are like an unhappy couple who aren’t speaking to and just want to needle each other , until one side gets fed up . So we’re using all this but it’s all a bit of an effort. And with the challenge it can still be  arguable if the VR has got it right anyway or they can’t be sure , so it’s a bit gimmicky . And it’s one error among many a ref may make … and thd next argument will be make it 3 , make it unlimited . Just like when the VR came in . 

[JohnM]

I think it works well in NRL games. Captains have to use it with great care, using only when they are sure they'll win the challenge.  Use it on some trivial point, lose, then regret it when towards the end of a game,  the ref misses something major. 

Don't give it to coaches. It's the players who are close to the action and who are best placed to see something the ref has missed.

[north yorks trinity]

5 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't know if it was due to technical. Issues, but at Newcastle of Saturday, it wasn't clear what was happening on the captains challenge. I had to explain to the newer fans round me who asked why they'd stopped. 

I noticed at the Scotland game yesterday they announced it and flashed it up on the screen. 

I was very confused at Newcastle as I had no idea the concept was being used. I was a bit concerned that it was the refs choice to check the incident and was worried where it would lead. Once I cottoned on, I think it's a great idea, as I said earlier. A frivolous challenge doesn't really worry me as it's a maximum of 2 per game. The teams that approach the idea most professionally will gain the most and I'm fine with that. I'm equally fine that Samoa chose to p!55 theirs away!!

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, north yorks trinity said:

I was very confused at Newcastle as I had no idea the concept was being used. I was a bit concerned that it was the refs choice to check the incident and was worried where it would lead. Once I cottoned on, I think it's a great idea, as I said earlier. A frivolous challenge doesn't really worry me as it's a maximum of 2 per game. The teams that approach the idea most professionally will gain the most and I'm fine with that. I'm equally fine that Samoa chose to p!55 theirs away!!

Am I right in saying you get one in each half, and you retain it if your challenge is successful?

[Sports Prophet]

Similar to the video decision, the captain challenge is poorly executed compared to NRL due to 3 main reasons.

1. lack of camera angles

2. and the inability of the video referee to see multiple angles at the same time

3. the director’s seemingly lack of foresight in what the video referee might want to see in any circumstance. 

[Sports Prophet]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Am I right in saying you get one in each half, and you retain it if your challenge is successful?

No, you get one per game and retain any time successful.

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

No, you get one per game and retain any time successful.

Cheers! 

[Damien]

I think it's awful and would hate to see it implemented in this country. It's just a needless gimmick that slows the game down.

[Niels]

I would argue it's better to take time and have the correct decision. Cricket uses a similar system which is very effective.

I think it helps the smaller teams as usually the perception is that the dominant sides, in all sports, seem to get an unconcious benefit of the doubt. 

Therefore it gives the smaller teams an opportunity to redress this, especially if used correctly.