NRL is inching closer to implementing a rule that will change the competition’s landscape forever

I like this rule, but it should be unlimited challenges and 10 minutes in the sin bin for the captain if wrong which carries over to the next game if in the final 10
 
Last edited:
I remember when Annesley was talked up as the one who would hold referees accountable for the howlers they still dish up without fear of repercussion or the threat of demotion. His best work to date has been apologizing to fans for their stuff ups a few times while allowing them to officiate matches again the next week despite them showing they're either useless or match fixing. And now Vlandis (someone with ties to gambling agencies) is being talked up too.

As others have mentioned this will probably just be used as a tool to give gassed teams a breather when they're in danger of being scored against. And I wouldn't even be surprised if we see that in many cases they'll give one team a three minute breather while they look at 16 different camera angles on the ground as well as the CCTV footage in the parking lot and the view of the stadium from google earthto ensure that nothing gets missed, while with other teams who attempt to use the rule this way will get a 5 second review from one camera angle that misses the overwhelming evidence that the refs call was wrong and an apology from Annesly when after the match every other angle shows it was wrong.
 
I am definitely in favour of this.

They get a single challenge. If both fuck it up, the most we lose is what? 60 seconds? Shit, we lose more for a scrum feed these days. What's an extra 2 minutes in a 40 minute half? Another opportunity to get more dip, put some charcoal on for the agila, or take a piss.

And if a captain wins multiple challenges - well - it's just balancing the game when the refs aren't doing their jobs properly. We have had this obsession with speeding the game up, but it is NEVER going to happen. Not with concussion rules, players feigning injury, KFC video ref decisions, dreadful time lost to scrum feeds... I think we need to get over the fact that the game is not as free-flowing as it was once, and accept the way it is currently played.

There is huge upside to this.
 
I’m all for it. It will make more decisions right and help the refs improve also. It’s only one challenge each if they are both wrong, won’t change the game too much
 
JayBee said:
I am definitely in favour of this.

They get a single challenge. If both fuck it up, the most we lose is what? 60 seconds? Shit, we lose more for a scrum feed these days. What's an extra 2 minutes in a 40 minute half? Another opportunity to get more dip, put some charcoal on for the agila, or take a piss.

And if a captain wins multiple challenges - well - it's just balancing the game when the refs aren't doing their jobs properly. We have had this obsession with speeding the game up, but it is NEVER going to happen. Not with concussion rules, players feigning injury, KFC video ref decisions, dreadful time lost to scrum feeds... I think we need to get over the fact that the game is not as free-flowing as it was once, and accept the way it is currently played.

There is huge upside to this.
Click to expand...

What's the upside though? You're assuming that they'll make the right decision once it's reviewed. How many times do they already screw up clear cut and obvious video reviews for tries?

As I said earlier, using the NFL and NBA as an example where they've expanded their coaches challenges, almost 90% of the time they confirm the original decision. Even in instances where it's blatantly the wrong decision.

But because they don't want to admit a mistake, and they want to discourage people from continually challenging, they end up dismissing everything regardless.

All this will do is create more controversy and waste time. The refs will never improve or hold themselves accountable. If way more professional leagues than the NRL can't get the review system right, I have no faith that the NRL will.
 
btrainben said:
What's the upside though? You're assuming that they'll make the right decision once it's reviewed. How many times do they already screw up clear cut and obvious video reviews for tries?

As I said earlier, using the NFL and NBA as an example where they've expanded their coaches challenges, almost 90% of the time they confirm the original decision. Even in instances where it's blatantly the wrong decision.

But because they don't want to admit a mistake, and they want to discourage people from continually challenging, they end up dismissing everything regardless.

All this will do is create more controversy and waste time. The refs will never improve or hold themselves accountable.
Click to expand...
So by your logic - if it's wrong the wrong call, then it will always be the wrong call?

It would seem your issue is not with this idea, but the plague we have with these referees (of which I can agree with).

So if this were an alternate universe, where we had Billy Harrigan, Sean Hamstead and Tim Mander running the show, would you be okay with it?

Bottom line - if this is going to help some situations, then I am for it.
 
JayBee said:
So by your logic - if it's wrong the wrong call, then it will always be the wrong call?

It would seem your issue is not with this idea, but the plague we have with these referees (of which I can agree with).

So if this were an alternate universe, where we had Billy Harrigan, Sean Hamstead and Tim Mander running the show, would you be okay with it?

Bottom line - if this is going to help some situations, then I am for it.
Click to expand...

No, Moghseen Jadwat is who I want running the show! Haha.. My issue is that the refs have been cuckolded by the increased influence of the video ref, which has led to a rapid decline in the basic standards of refereeing.

It wouldn't matter who was in charge. I remember when Harrigan was refs boss he said they conducted a lengthy review of themselves and their decisions and found that they were right over 95% of the time.

The holes in that flawed logic are too many to list but this is the kind of closed minded and insecure mentality that these referees have and always will. And it's not just the NRL, it's most sporting leagues around the world now. Refs are a union and workforce just like any other and they'll back each other up no matter how wrong they are in order to justify their existence and keep their jobs.

The way i see it, the less video review, the better. They should only be allowed to review blatant foul play and groundings..

The more reliance there is on the video ref, and since two refs came in, refs have become lazier and refuse to back themselves and call what they see because they know it can be reviewed. So they're hesitant and tentative and this will only exascerbate the problem.
 
Last edited:
btrainben said:
No, Moghseen Jadwat is who I want running the show! Haha.. My issue is that the refs have been cuckolded by the increased influence of the video ref, which has led to a rapid decline in the basic standards of refereeing.

It wouldn't matter who was in charge. I remember when Harrigan was refs boss he said they conducted a lengthy review of themselves and their decisions and found that they were right over 95% of the time.

The holes in that flawed logic are too many to list but this is the kind of closed minded and insecure mentality that these referees have and always will. And it's not just the NRL, it's most sporting leagues around the world now. Refs are a union and workforce just like any other and they'll back each other up no matter how wrong they are in order to justify their existence and keep their jobs.

The way i see it, the less video review, the better. They should only be allowed to review blatant foul play and groundings..

The more reliance there is on the video ref, and since two refs came in, refs have become lazier and refuse to back themselves and call what they see because they know it can be reviewed. So they're hesitant and tentative and this will only exascerbate the problem.
Click to expand...
Fair bit of logic used there, of which I cannot refute.

I do agree that a 1 referee system worked better, and the current system has led to some sort of reliance on others.

I just think its getting to a point where the system is rotten enough, and anything to make it better might be beneficial.
 
JayBee said:
Fair bit of logic used there, of which I cannot refute.

I do agree that a 1 referee system worked better, and the current system has led to some sort of reliance on others.

I just think its getting to a point where the system is rotten enough, and anything to make it better might be beneficial.
Click to expand...

We'll see how it goes. I hope it helps things as the last thing the game needs is more refereeing controversies game in game out. The less we talk about the refs, the better.
 
btrainben said:
We'll see how it goes. I hope it helps things as the last thing the game needs is more refereeing controversies game in game out. The less we talk about the refs, the better.
Click to expand...
TBF to them - the officiating (well, at least the bunker) to start the year last year was really good!

We weren't really talking about it until about mid-season. From there, I felt like it was like watching people drive in the rain.. wind down the window, crack their skull open and toss their brains out
 
They keep evolving the game with weird crap, leave the game alone, still seeing red over two refs, way too technical stop start affair.
Expecting perfect robot teams?
 
The Toddy Bears (ARLC) really don't seem to understand the concept of "value add" do they?
 
Personally I don't think the Captain's Challenge will be used that much in try scoring plays, there is already enough reviewing and scrutiny there. More the 50/50 general play calls that we always seem to be on the losing side of. If we can get that back closer to 50/50 then I'll be happy. Plus it's not just the Challenge itself that may have an effect, it is the thoughts in the ref's minds that we could challenge and he will be shown up as making the wrong calls against us more often than the other way around. Keep the bastards honest, well at least a bit more honest than they are now.

Go Dogs
 
I watched Black Caps v India at the ground last night fk that game is long enough without a challenge and it was 2020!!
 
More reasons for the refs to fuck up, they'll cop less blame and it allows the NRL to clean it's hands from the bad decisions because the captain will cop the blame for not challenging!
 
2144superman said:
Fifteen seconds to save a season.

That’s the precious thinking time Boyd Cordner, Cameron Smith, Wade Graham and every other NRL club captain will get for the NRL’s new captain’s challenge rule.

If a captain wants to challenge a knock-on, illegal steal or obstruction in 2020, he will have a ticking clock of just 15 seconds from the moment the incident occurs to lodge an official challenge.

Any longer than 15 seconds and the opportunity is lost. Play on.

The NRL is inching closer to implementing the rule, which they believe could be a game changer for rugby league and an exciting new addition for fans, who for too long have gone home from matches feeling empty after a refereeing howler.

4959c5dc2cce2ff0c606005911602452


This rule puts the onus — not all, but a large percentage — back on the team’s captain, as opposed to the referee.

Captains will need to rely heavily on the honesty of their teammates in deciding whether to challenge a call. A wrong call could prove monumental.

A premiership could be decided on the back of a captain’s ability to challenge a call, such is the power that every on-field leader could soon possess to review a refereeing decision.

In the heat of battle, imagine the pressure on Cordner coming from pumped-up Roosters enforcer Jared Waerea-Hargreaves for his skipper to challenge a call.

Imagine the pressure on Cordner being hurled from fans with the Roosters and Raiders locked-up at 10-10 with only minutes to play.

Imagine Storm coach Craig Bellamy thumping the glass of his coaches box, demanding Cameron Smith challenge the call after Josh Addo-Carr was ruled to have put his boot over the sideline.

14fe24d236e166497ad2675943abb296


And then imagine Bellamy’s face when he realises Smith can’t challenge the decision because he wasted the Storm’s one and only challenge on a referee’s decision in the first-half that replays prove was correct.

The entire strategy and implementation plan for the captain’s challenge rule — including how, when and where captains can use the rule during every match of the 2020 season — is set to be unveiled to the ARL Commission at a crucial meeting in Sydney on Thursday.

The Sunday Telegraph has learned the NRL are leaning towards giving captains 15 seconds — possibly less, but certainly no more — to use their challenge.

What we can also tell you is that after deep consultation and analysis by the NRL football department to ensure the game continues to flow, captains will be given just one challenge per game.

If a captain successfully challenges a call by the referee and the decision is overturned, the captain will keep his one challenge.

But if a challenge is lodged and the replays show the referee’s original call was correct, the captain loses his challenge for the remainder of the match.

Under the current proposal set to be outlined to the Commission, there are limitations on what captains can and can’t challenge during play.

They will be allowed to challenge a decision by the referee to ignore going to the video review bunker for a possible try.

They can also challenge penalties for illegal player strips, obstruction calls, knock-ons, or if a fullback is deemed to have touched a ball rolling dead in-goal.

Captains won’t be allowed to yell “challenge, challenge” at the referee the moment that the opposition is racing away for a runaway try.

ARL chairman Peter V’landys has made no secret of his desire to win back fans and sponsors and increase participation, sponsorship and TV numbers. Which means he isn’t afraid to look outside the square.

When the majority of a surveyed 18,000 fans declared a captain’s challenge was the No.1 rule change they would like to see, NRL head football Graham Annesley revealed in October the code would spend summer preparing for its implementation for the 2020 season.

On Thursday the ARL Commission will decide whether to give the rule change the green light.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/s...k/news-story/80c85f899a404f5316ed4c2c5260b950
Click to expand...
Fuck no no no no no, aren’t these muppets supposed to be simplifying the rules not adding more confusion to them, thus creating more and more controversy! This rule as usual will most likely only benefit the top teams with the best argumentative coaches ie Bennett, Bellamy and co. And the likes of us and all the other clubs trying fairly to get a proper fair decision go our way will as usual get fucken shafted like we always have...
 
Cam Smith already challenges the referees enough as it is!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top