Bunker far superior to video ref

[Cheadle Leyther]

This morning was a shining example of how to speed up video ref decisions. In the Raiders v Titans, the referee gave what he thought was a try to the Titans. But just before the conversion was taken, the bunker had detected that the player had bounced the ball over the tryline - all done within 2 minutes. 
Meanwhile we have to go through watching even obvious put downs from all angles in order to have a reason to disallow.

[sam4731]

What's the difference? Camera quality.

[Harry Stottle]

9 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

What's the difference? Camera quality.

100% yes, and how many cameras are utilised compared to over here?

I have said it all along if we are going to copy the NRL then do it properly not just a half hearted attempt, if the excuse is there is not enough money to emulate how it is produced and done down under then drop it and revert to what we had for well over 100 years.

Edited May 18 by Harry Stottle

[Harry Stottle]

9 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

What's the difference? Camera quality.

Just another thought Sam, with the Aussies coming here in the Autumn do you think the BBC will continue with 'just enough' cameras, I doubt that will satisfy the NR, especially after more camera's could have given a different ruling the last time a Aussie team visited these shores!

To your knowledge (or anyone else) has there been any mention of the officials Refs and VR's for that series, ours or theirs? Albeit it is probably a bit early for that yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't already been discussed at the highest level when arranging the series.

[sam4731]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

100% yes, and how many cameras are utilised compared to over here?

I have said it all along if we are going to copy the NRL then do it properly not just a half hearted attempt, if the excuse is there is not enough money to emulate how it is produced and done down under then drop it and revert to what we had for well over 100 years.

I also think a major flaws (and I don't know if it's the same for the bunker) but, the VR doesn't control what he's watching. He tells whoever does, what angle he wants and when to speed up or slow the video down but there is always a disconnect which slows the whole process down massively.

[sam4731]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Just another thought Sam, with the Aussies coming here in the Autumn do you think the BBC will continue with 'just enough' cameras, I doubt that will satisfy the NR, especially after more camera's could have given a different ruling the last time a Aussie team visited these shores!

To your knowledge (or anyone else) has there been any mention of the officials Refs and VR's for that series, ours or theirs? Albeit it is probably a bit early for that yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't already been discussed at the highest level when arranging the series.

At the end of the day, as far as the NRL are concerned, this has nothing to do with them, and they'll be focusing their attention on the Pacific Championships.

[OldRedEyes]

57 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

What's the difference? Camera quality.

I think the process is just better too, regardless of quality. 

Try in the Wests South game just now is a casing point. Our VR would still be looking at it, they’ve kicked off. 

Given as a try, no clear view of it being grounded - inconclusive, but it didn’t delay the conversation and the end product is so much better. 

[Harry Stottle]

37 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

At the end of the day, as far as the NRL are concerned, this has nothing to do with them, and they'll be focusing their attention on the Pacific Championships.

Yes the PC's are very meaningful to the NRL, BUT this is an Ashes series against the 'old enemy' the series being the one that mattered above all others, now I don't know your age Sam but to those brought up on 'The Ashes' it matters above all else, and I do know of a 64 year old and his expierience of Ashes football that being the Australian coach Mr Mal Meninga what do you think his feelings of series means to him?

[sam4731]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

Yes the PC's are very meaningful to the NRL, BUT this is an Ashes series against the 'old enemy' the series being the one that mattered above all others, now I don't know your age Sam but to those brought up on 'The Ashes' it matters above all else, and I do know of a 64 year old and his expierience of Ashes football that being the Australian coach Mr Mal Meninga what do you think his feelings of series means to him?

I agree that it will mean a lot to AUSTRALIANS but I think that the NRL is a separate entity that is only interested in its self interest. This is not necessarily a bad thing. They are at the end of the day a business and this Autumn, their business interests lie in the PC. They'll be keenly watching to see how the Ashes pan out, but as their involvement goes, I think they'll happily take a back seat.

[dkw]

There's a lot of complaints about the bunker from nrl fans though, it's not without its limitations and problems. It is better than our current version most of the time, but not by that much. I've seen plenty of bad decisions by them, and they are currently intervening for "high tackles" a ridiculous amount of times, sometimes going back several tackles to alert the ref.

Edited May 18 by dkw

[Harry Stottle]

14 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

I agree that it will mean a lot to AUSTRALIANS but I think that the NRL is a separate entity that is only interested in its self interest. This is not necessarily a bad thing. They are at the end of the day a business and this Autumn, their business interests lie in the PC. They'll be keenly watching to see how the Ashes pan out, but as their involvement goes, I think they'll happily take a back seat.

Are you telling me that this forthcoming Ashes series has nothing to do with the NRL, that they have no say in it and taking it to the 'nth degree' if they so wanted to they could stop NRL players from participating?

[sam4731]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Are you telling me that this forthcoming Ashes series has nothing to do with the NRL, that they have no say in it and taking it to the 'nth degree' if they so wanted to they could stop NRL players from participating?

Of course they were involved in its organisation and elements of it will remain under its control but they will very much be a silent partner in how it's run.

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

I sound like a broken record, but the video ref is the main reason why I only watch a game a week or so of Super League 

It's just really boring- I'd much prefer a 95 min match with a refereeing error than a 110 minute watch (with 7 or 8 forensic examinations) 

The obvious solution is 1 captains challenge per team (with no referrals after trys)

[Harry Stottle]

7 minutes ago, Rugbyleaguesupporter said:

I sound like a broken record, but the video ref is the main reason why I only watch a game a week or so of Super League 

It's just really boring- I'd much prefer a 95 min match with a refereeing error than a 110 minute watch (with 7 or 8 forensic examinations) 

The obvious solution is 1 captains challenge per team (with no referrals after trys)

As I have said before, when you are at these 'extended' games on the terraces or in the stands it is 'bloody boring' with the all the stoppages, I am strongly considering whether or not to attend next season not biying a season ticket, which will be the first time since I don't know when.

Edited May 18 by Harry Stottle

[ClarenceRL]

56 minutes ago, Rugbyleaguesupporter said:

I sound like a broken record, but the video ref is the main reason why I only watch a game a week or so of Super League 

It's just really boring- I'd much prefer a 95 min match with a refereeing error than a 110 minute watch (with 7 or 8 forensic examinations) 

The obvious solution is 1 captains challenge per team (with no referrals after trys)

I agree entirely. This would be my number one priority to improve the game. The current situation massively detracts from what is supposed to be great about the sport - its fast and free flowing nature.

[Gerrumonside ref]

7 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

100% yes, and how many cameras are utilised compared to over here?

I have said it all along if we are going to copy the NRL then do it properly not just a half hearted attempt, if the excuse is there is not enough money to emulate how it is produced and done down under then drop it and revert to what we had for well over 100 years.

I don’t mind it but at times the limitations in our coverage mean it can’t really be compared to what the NRL are doing.

I think most of the delay and dithering that nobody likes is down to a paucity of visual evidence because the tech is not up to scratch.

Equally I don’t like rushed or certainty in decisions when video footage doesn’t support it, but I for one don’t mind hearing debates over ref decisions as long as it’s within certain boundaries of taste.

Roll on the future when we do have Bunker-esque technology to support our ambitions 

Edited May 18 by Gerrumonside ref

[Gerrumonside ref]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

As I have said before, when you are at these 'extended' games on the terraces or in the stands it is 'bloody boring' with the all the stoppages, I am strongly considering whether or not to attend next season not biying a season ticket, which will be the first time since I don't know when.

Sorry to hear this Harry as Leigh are very competitive, but yes it does detract from the enjoyment as people dither when they don’t have the tools to do some video ref decisions.

[phiggins]

Just get rid of video ref altogether. We don’t have enough full time refs of sufficient quality to sustain having 2 at every game. Let the refs we do have concentrate on developing themselves as on field referees. 

[Luke HKR]

3 hours ago, OldRedEyes said:

I think the process is just better too, regardless of quality. 

Try in the Wests South game just now is a casing point. Our VR would still be looking at it, they’ve kicked off. 

Given as a try, no clear view of it being grounded - inconclusive, but it didn’t delay the conversation and the end product is so much better. 

Agree with this.

 

The try yesterday not given for obstruction.  You could tell first view, add the second view then give no try. Not watch both views endless times. Just back your judgement. 

But do think we Need to stop this sending it up as try/no try. Just say, can you look and let them decide.

[Father Gascoigne]

I've never found this to be a problem in rugby league. Both systems are lightning quick compared to some of the other sports I watch.

[The Future is League]

5 hours ago, Cheadle Leyther said:

This morning was a shining example of how to speed up video ref decisions. In the Raiders v Titans, the referee gave what he thought was a try to the Titans. But just before the conversion was taken, the bunker had detected that the player had bounced the ball over the tryline - all done within 2 minutes. 
Meanwhile we have to go through watching even obvious put downs from all angles in order to have a reason to disallow.

 

5 hours ago, sam4731 said:

What's the difference? Camera quality.

 

5 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

100% yes, and how many cameras are utilised compared to over here?

I have said it all along if we are going to copy the NRL then do it properly not just a half hearted attempt, if the excuse is there is not enough money to emulate how it is produced and done down under then drop it and revert to what we had for well over 100 years.

In goal touch touches here MIGHT speed up the procress here.

[dkw]

1 hour ago, phiggins said:

Just get rid of video ref altogether. We don’t have enough full time refs of sufficient quality to sustain having 2 at every game. Let the refs we do have concentrate on developing themselves as on field referees. 

I think it should be kept for factual decisions, body/ball out of play, offsides etc.

Anything opinion based should just stay with the onfield officials.

[sam4731]

When the discussion comes to getting rid of VR/VAR I always ask the same question, which I will ask anyone who has said that they want to get rid of it here.

Would your opinion stay the same if you knew now that your team would lose a CC/SL final based on a bad call that would have been overturned by VR?

If your honest answer is yes, then you're a better man than me.

[OldRedEyes]

42 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

When the discussion comes to getting rid of VR/VAR I always ask the same question, which I will ask anyone who has said that they want to get rid of it here.

Would your opinion stay the same if you knew now that your team would lose a CC/SL final based on a bad call that would have been overturned by VR?

If your honest answer is yes, then you're a better man than me.

True! 

But it’s also a fear that we score a last minute winner and it’s overturned by an incompetent system & VR. 

Also, for genuine game breaking huge 50/50 calls; it’s completely understandable. Take as much time as you want. 

It’s the 95% of the other calls just kill the game that aren’t 50/50.  Clear obstruction yesterday in the HKR game seen from multiple angles whilst the VR flip flops. 

[sam4731]

23 minutes ago, OldRedEyes said:

True! 

But it’s also a fear that we score a last minute winner and it’s overturned by an incompetent system & VR. 

Also, for genuine game breaking huge 50/50 calls; it’s completely understandable. Take as much time as you want. 

It’s the 95% of the other calls just kill the game that aren’t 50/50.  Clear obstruction yesterday in the HKR game seen from multiple angles whilst the VR flip flops. 

A referee/VR has to by definition, treat a decision the same whether it's a potential winner in the last minute of the GF or a dead rubber 3 weeks from the end of the season. Anything else undermines the integrity of refereeing as a whole.