Fri 22nd Sept: SL: Leigh Leopards v Wigan Warriors KO 20:00 (Sky)

[LeeF]

7 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

The behind the try line showed clearly it was minimal contact on the inside shoulder not impacting French's ability to get close to Gildart 

It didn’t. As I said the threshold is very high to overturn. 

[Dave T]

23 minutes ago, LeeF said:

The VR did look at the correct incident as the ball had long gone from the earlier potential incident and had no impact. 

I actually think that the VR wanted to give a try but couldn’t find clear evidence to support as the camera angle from “Leigh” did not show the impact on French whilst the other angles were not fully clear.

The reason for this being the very high threshold required for a VR to overrule the onfield decision which rules out going on a likely and more towards a definite if you follow what I’m saying. Whether that needs tweaking is a discussion for next season. 

This morning’s review session will have been lively!!!

Tbh, I think there was a very good camera angle that showed it very clearly. I get the point about threshold, I just don't think it's a great system, the ref is saying he has doubt. 

[LeeF]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Tbh, I think there was a very good camera angle that showed it very clearly. I get the point about threshold, I just don't think it's a great system, the ref is saying he has doubt. 

The one from behind the Leigh line didn’t show the contact. It went off the screen. The ones behind the defensive line weren’t fully clear for the threshold. More cameras would be useful but that’s a cost thing. As with all systems you need to continually develop and hopefully this will happen once the Ganson investigation has finished and someone is appointed to the “Head of” role. 

[Futtocks]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

I'm hoping we have Mr Moore or Mr Griffith's as the ref on Friday now

But what happens when every single referee available has made a decision you don't like at some point? Is the whole game "gone" then?

Edited September 25 by Futtocks

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, LeeF said:

The one from behind the Leigh line didn’t show the contact. It went off the screen. The ones behind the defensive line weren’t fully clear for the threshold. More cameras would be useful but that’s a cost thing. As with all systems you need to continually develop and hopefully this will happen once the Ganson investigation has finished and someone is appointed to the “Head of” role. 

The one behind the defensive line addressed what the ref asked for which was whether it was contact on the outside shoulder. It wasn't. 

[LeeF]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The one behind the defensive line addressed what the ref asked for which was whether it was contact on the outside shoulder. It wasn't. 

At the time I thought it didn’t in full, probably due to the way cameras work, but I understand why others would disagree.
At the end of the day it was probably a try but I can fully understand why it wasn’t given. 

[GUBRATS]

8 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

But what happens when every single referee available has made a decision you don't like at some point? Is the whole game "gone" then?

Hence the  

Although I'm sure it'd be fresh in the mind  

Personally don't think it'll make any difference , can't see us beating HKR , so it'll be them that will suffer from the disciplinary anomaly 

[GUBRATS]

5 minutes ago, LeeF said:

At the time I thought it didn’t in full, probably due to the way cameras work, but I understand why others would disagree.
At the end of the day it was probably a try but I can fully understand why it wasn’t given. 

I can understand , the VR didn't want to overturn a fellow refs decision , if that's the case , why have them ? 

[LeeF]

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

I can understand , the VR didn't want to overturn a fellow refs decision , if that's the case , why have them ? 

Not at all. The VR do overrule but you know that so are just being awkward as per so I’ll leave you to it

[GUBRATS]

7 minutes ago, LeeF said:

Not at all. The VR do overrule but you know that so are just being awkward as per so I’ll leave you to it

He was asked , " checking on an outside shoulder contact " , there wasn't one 

[Dave T]

21 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

He was asked , " checking on an outside shoulder contact " , there wasn't one 

What I would say on that, and I agree with you on the fact it should have been given imo, is that once it goes to the VR, they can look at whatever they want, not just what the ref asks for. 

It's one of the reasons getting the refs opinion is a bit of a nonsense imo, as the VR can look at the whole lot. We either work on what the ref has said or review the whole lot. We have a bit of a muddle right now. 

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

What I would say on that, and I agree with you on the fact it should have been given imo, is that once it goes to the VR, they can look at whatever they want, not just what the ref asks for. 

It's one of the reasons getting the refs opinion is a bit of a nonsense imo, as the VR can look at the whole lot. We either work on what the ref has said or review the whole lot. We have a bit of a muddle right now. 

Better the old " is there any reason not to give the try " you mean ? 

[Dunbar]

50 minutes ago, Dave T said:

What I would say on that, and I agree with you on the fact it should have been given imo, is that once it goes to the VR, they can look at whatever they want, not just what the ref asks for. 

It's one of the reasons getting the refs opinion is a bit of a nonsense imo, as the VR can look at the whole lot. We either work on what the ref has said or review the whole lot. We have a bit of a muddle right now. 

If I was the video ref, I would rule out every try for an incorrect play the ball.

That would show 'em.

[unapologetic pedant]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Picked the right name didn't you!

Just as a point of interest how old are you?

Do you want to change the law on forward passes?

What wording would you change to?

Reasonable questions.

[unapologetic pedant]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

Tbh, I think there was a very good camera angle that showed it very clearly. I get the point about threshold, I just don't think it's a great system, the ref is saying he has doubt. 

You say the ref had doubt. I say doubt means play on, which in a try-scoring move means send it up as a try. What's your view on that?

[phiggins]

2 hours ago, LeeF said:

It didn’t. As I said the threshold is very high to overturn. 

A very high threshold to overturn does seem strange for off the ball incidents. Did the ref really have a better view, probably in the corner of his eye as he’s following the play than the angle given to the video ref?

[GUBRATS]

3 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

 

And is this out of the hands or relative to the ground?

Does that mean you can run towards your own try line and throw the ball backwards( forwards ) ?

[unapologetic pedant]

8 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Does that mean you can run towards your own try line and throw the ball backwards( forwards ) ?

No.

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, unapologetic pedant said:

No.

Why not ?

 

[unapologetic pedant]

7 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Why not ?

 

Because the ball would travel out of the hands towards the opposition dead-ball line. 

[GUBRATS]

34 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Because the ball would travel out of the hands towards the opposition dead-ball line. 

I thought it wasn't relative to the ground ? 

[unapologetic pedant]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

I thought it wasn't relative to the ground ? 

Towards the plane of the dead ball line.

[LeeF]

10 hours ago, phiggins said:

A very high threshold to overturn does seem strange for off the ball incidents. Did the ref really have a better view, probably in the corner of his eye as he’s following the play than the angle given to the video ref?

And that’s what will be considered at the end of the year. I thought it was ok but can 100% understand why it wasn’t awarded. 

[Harry Stottle]

12 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Do you want to change the law on forward passes?

What wording would you change to?

Reasonable questions.

Answer my question first please, it may well be relevant to how I answer yours.

[Dave T]

12 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

You say the ref had doubt. I say doubt means play on, which in a try-scoring move means send it up as a try. What's your view on that?

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are asking.