No captains challenge in 2024 in Super League match's

[The Future is League]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/24772591/super-league-rugby-captains-challenge/

[Midlands hobo]

I have issues with the challenge in the NRL. 

The concept is good however the reality is pretty poor. Too many times a challenge was won but the team still lost due to the bunker spotting another infringement that was neither part of the original call or the challenge.

Became a bit of a farce.

[Dave T]

I know it's the sun,  but interesting that it says in there something about non-televised games. 

I also don't buy the implementation challenges, this should be a modest complexity change, they have used VR's for 25 years now, and there are plenty of models used in other sports. 

I wonder if they are worried that the 'broadcast quality' won't be high quality enough to spot minor infringements that Captains Call is often used for. 

[Farmduck]

One thing the challenge has exposed is that often the players don't understand the ref's ruling. In the recent AUS/NZ game there was a challenge against a knock-on. The tackled player lost the ball clearly backwards in the tackle (or when he hit the ground) and he was very vocal towards the captain to challenge the ruling. The challenge showed that the tackled player hadn't knocked on but a teammate had, in attempting to gather the ball. This was the knock-on that the ref had ruled. Completely useless waste of a challenge.

I've seen others, whose details I can't recall, where the challenging captain clearly didn't understand the ref's ruling but, because of the 10-second limit, hadn't got an explanation of the ruling before challenging it. We see so many times where. with three tacklers in a tackle and a couple of close attacking support players, there are opportunities for 4 or 5 different players to have contacted the ball and it only takes one to knock on so the fact that one or two are adamant they didn't knock on doesn't prove anything.

One of the saving graces of the Challenge is that so many teams use it poorly that it's often over and done by the 20-minute mark.

[Damien]

I can't say this bothers me as the captains challenge just seems a gimmick to me. The reasons are small time though and so Rugby League in this country.

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, Damien said:

I can't say this bothers me as the captains challenge just seems a gimmick to me. The reasons are small time though and so Rugby League in this country.

Aye, that's my position here. Don't massively care about the actual initiative, but it does suggest to me that maybe the whole VR system that we will be introducing won't be particularly slick. 

[Hopie]

There was a try at Odsal during this year's playoffs that went to the VR, the ref asked for a different angle a few times, there weren't any so he has no choice but to give the on field guess. I hope "broadcast quality" is well defined.

[graveyard johnny]

just another boring stoppage that disrupts the modern game that used to be so action packed

[Whippet13]

Seen NRL teams use it to slow a game down and take a break, especially late on when they are defending a lead.

[unapologetic pedant]

14 hours ago, Farmduck said:

One thing the challenge has exposed is that often the players don't understand the ref's ruling. 

Sometimes the refs don't understand their own ruling.

In a Roosters/Tigers NRLW game, there was a completed tackle on Jess Sergis, who got to her feet, stumbled and kicked the ball forward. Ref blew the whistle, Roosters reckoned there was interference and challenged. Ref told the bunker the ruling was "knock-on". Complete rubbish, how can you knock the ball on with your foot? The correct ruling was "loss of control" or "incorrect PTB". Bunker searched back and decided the ball-carrier had lost the ball into a defender much earlier in the play. Challenge denied. Bunker didn't even look at the incident that prompted the call. And ref wouldn't have been any the wiser unless she watched it afterwards.

[The Rocket]

The greatest problem for me with the Challenge has that it has seemed to encourage more knock-on calls from the referees, knowing that if they`ve made an error, the captain of the team that the call was made against can challenge it and it will be overturned. It`s so easy now for ref`s to call knock-on for this reason and it`s a blight to the flow of the game. I`m sure it wasn`t designed so ref`s can abrogate responsibility for making definitive knock-on calls.

Other than that abuse, I think it can add to the drama and I haven`t minded it.

[George Watt]

30 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

The greatest problem for me with the Challenge has that it has seemed to encourage more knock-on calls from the referees, knowing that if they`ve made an error, the captain of the team that the call was made against can challenge it and it will be overturned. It`s so easy now for ref`s to call knock-on for this reason and it`s a blight to the flow of the game. I`m sure it wasn`t designed so ref`s can abrogate responsibility for making definitive knock-on calls.

Other than that abuse, I think it can add to the drama and I haven`t minded it.

Completely agree. It can be exploited but so are other rules eg PTB!

[unapologetic pedant]

13 hours ago, The Rocket said:

The greatest problem for me with the Challenge has that it has seemed to encourage more knock-on calls from the referees, knowing that if they`ve made an error, the captain of the team that the call was made against can challenge it and it will be overturned. It`s so easy now for ref`s to call knock-on for this reason and it`s a blight to the flow of the game. I`m sure it wasn`t designed so ref`s can abrogate responsibility for making definitive knock-on calls.

Captain's Challenge conveniently shifts responsibility for bad knock-on calls on to the players. Can't blame the refs for taking the easy way out. Long intimidated by the media to get every decision correct, however long it takes and whatever effect on the game as a spectacle. Or when Graham Annesley's idea of disarming self-deprecation is chucking them under the bus when they miss anything.

Once the game has been stopped, what can never be recovered is the chance to take advantage of the loose ball in broken-field.

Similar thing now with held-up over the goal-line. Ball-carrier doesn't claim the try, wants to get back to the 10m line and quickly play on. Ref has a good view, must be all but certain the ball wasn't down. But still we have to wait while the bunker confirms from all available angles what everybody knew all along. The logic of the Captain's Challenge applied here would give the attacking team the right to decline a review.

[sam4731]

15 hours ago, The Rocket said:

The greatest problem for me with the Challenge has that it has seemed to encourage more knock-on calls from the referees, knowing that if they`ve made an error, the captain of the team that the call was made against can challenge it and it will be overturned. It`s so easy now for ref`s to call knock-on for this reason and it`s a blight to the flow of the game. I`m sure it wasn`t designed so ref`s can abrogate responsibility for making definitive knock-on calls.

Other than that abuse, I think it can add to the drama and I haven`t minded it.

I remember reading an article a few years ago with Richard Silverwood where he said that a lot of the time refs are just guessing when it comes to knock ons vs ball steals especially in the darker winter months and a lot of their decisions are ultimately decided by the direction of the ball. Its just one of those things that we have to accept as being inconsistent and that it probably roughly balances out eventually.

[ivans82]

Regarding knock ons , refs who cannot definitely rule that it was a knock on or a ball steal , should have the option of handing ball back to the player and starting the tackle count from where he left off .....i.e. supposed infringement on 4th tackle , count resumes from there .

[unapologetic pedant]

17 minutes ago, ivans82 said:

Regarding knock ons , refs who cannot definitely rule that it was a knock on or a ball steal , should have the option of handing ball back to the player and starting the tackle count from where he left off .....i.e. supposed infringement on 4th tackle , count resumes from there .

That still means stopping the game. And where would the mark be?

Makes far more sense to just play on. If the team who were in possession claim the ball - tackle 4. If the opposition claim the ball - tackle 1.

In respect of the latter outcome, shouldn't be a zero tackle since the rationale behind the play-on call is that officials aren't sure how the ball came free.

[Gomersall]

Has anyone let TRL know?