Challenge System

[Nashy]

Did we have a challenge rule for stripping that was complete BS because teams were only using it to get a little rest?

Should be focusing on having better refs, and better coaches than the current two douchebags, not stopping a game to check for a **** up.

 

[Hamm.0]

Agree with Nashy.
My concern is the following scenario;
Team Ramrod has just defended 4 sets of 6 on their line & made an infringement in the ruck. The particular players involved know full well they are guilty, but the skipper knows his team is exhausted & will probably crack under pressure & let in a try in the ensuing set. Ramrod's skipper challenges the play/ruling knowing full well what the result will be, however also knowing he just earnt his team 3 minutes rest.

 

[vertigo]

Don't see how a challenge is going to help anything when video refs are no better in terms of f*ck ups, plus it just wastes time and will be exploited to get a breather.

New rules I want to see implemented before anything else - reducing the interchange and getting rid of this 'seperation' bullshit and making a try control with the hand/s.

 

[subsbligh]

Agree with Nashy.
My concern is the following scenario;
Team Ramrod has just defended 4 sets of 6 on their line & made an infringement in the ruck. The particular players involved know full well they are guilty, but the skipper knows his team is exhausted & will probably crack under pressure & let in a try in the ensuing set. Ramrod's skipper challenges the play/ruling knowing full well what the result will be, however also knowing he just earnt his team 3 minutes rest.

Surely BHQ is smarter than Mick Crocker.

Maybe:
- you can't challenge inside your own 20
- challenge inside your own 20 costs 2 challenges
- any try scored after an unsuccessful challenge inside own 20 earns 6 points
- other than the allotted challenges, no other rulings are allowed to be reviewed by video refs (would speed up those high shot lie downs)
- refs will be able to tell captains to bugger off when they whinge for time wasting purposes now "Are you using a challenge? No - well don't talk to me". Will probably speed the game up.

 

[subsbligh]

If we did that channel 9 wouldn't even need to put an ad in for Big Brother - they could just play an episode instead.

It's just what we do as fans for every video replay sitting there in the stands..

"But Slater knocks it backwards... remember Tate's no try in the Origin... blah blah blah"

 

[subsbligh]

Don't see how a challenge is going to help anything when video refs are no better in terms of f*ck ups, plus it just wastes time and will be exploited to get a breather.

New rules I want to see implemented before anything else - reducing the interchange and getting rid of this 'seperation' bullshit and making a try control with the hand/s.

And for the record I think the on-field ref should have complete responsibility for video ref calls. He should go to the tape himself, like the do in NFL. That way he can check what he thinks is the problem, rather than going upstairs and blaming someone else who didn't see it in real time close up

 

[Kaz]

I have thought long & hard about this. (OK, less than a minute)

Get rid of the 2 onfield refs, we all know it's a failure.

The '2nd' ref, is the ref that views the challenge. He is in a box by himself & doesn't have contact with anyone.

He makes his decision & that flashes up on the screen.

 

[Nashy]

I want simple rule changes. Not adding a new rule, that then completely changes how the game will be played. You can't **** with scoring.

 

[Kaz]

Well if this rule was already in, we may have won last week, but because the ref facked up with the Reed penalty, the Dogs scored just before half time.

 

[Coxy]

Agreed. Any general field challenge should only be ruled via 1 look at 3 different angles in normal speed and then an immediate decision. If not sure after those 3 looks the on field decision stays.

That should see the pause no more than 30 seconds.
And it should only apply to:
- stripping/knock on calls
- Ruck infringements (eg penalised for holding down, but tackled player being held on to/pushed)
- Marker offside
- kick off side
- foul play (high tackles, dangerous throws, backplay infringements etc)

Shouldn't apply to general off side, forward passes.
1 unsuccessful challenge per half, and another for extra time if applicable.

I think adding it to extra time could be huge. Referees don't penalise. There's numerous times markers are offside etc. Challenge, get a penalty, march down field.

 

[Culhwch]

I think adding it to extra time could be huge. Referees don't penalise. There's numerous times markers are offside etc. Challenge, get a penalty, march down field.

But in that case when does the challenge flag (or whatever it is) get thrown? At the point of the tackle? That means a stoppage mid-set, which I'm not sure I like the idea of. Not to mention the potential for abuse. Say you're thrity-five metres out, fourth tackle, hooker scurries straight into the markers and the flag is thrown. Play stops for the review - if the penalty is given, fine, but if it's not you still get the advantage of using the stoppage to set up for the field goal attempt.

I almost think it has to be limited to natural stoppages in play - scoring, penalties, knock-ons.

 

[Anonymous person]

The idea of a challenge is that you can only challenge a call that has been made, not that you challenge FOR a call to be made.

Ie you can't get tackled and then call for the tackle to be challenged. What you would do is, using the origin as an example, challenge the 20m tap call to nsw and get it changed to the correct call of a drop-out. It wouldn't be for non-calls, it'd be to change incorrect calls.

 

[Coxy]

Well that's pretty pointless because I think some of the biggest game changers are those non-calls.

 

[Kimlo]

Well that's pretty pointless because I think some of the biggest game changers are those non-calls.

Perhaps but doing it that way you could implement the system without any real effect on the game.

 

[Kaz]

They will have to do something about teams that will challenge nearly everything, to get an advantage. ( Dogs, Manly, Tigers to name the worst offenders)

If a challenge is unsuccessful, they get penalised for time wasting. (Ennis & Farah will self-combust)

I know, I will get hammered.

But some teams will abuse the system.

 

[The Brizz]

I don't like the idea of challenges.

I want them to go back to 1 referee and to the video referee getting one look at each angle and then being forced to make a decision if at which point he doesn't know he gives it to the ref down stairs. The game was officiated with much less controversy for 100 years without the extra refereeing involvement adding more rules/stoppages isn't going to improve the overall quality of getting results correct.

 

[Kaz]

I don't think anyone really likes the challenge system, but something has to be done.

These days, when I go to watch the games on TV, my first thought before the games start is, I wonder what stuff up the refs will dish out this game.

My love for League is dwindling because of the refs, Harrigan & Raper.

 

[Porthoz]

We can't look at the past as a reference, for the simple reason that the technology has evolved and will keep evolving to a point where it can and should help the referees.

A challenge system can help avoid costly stuff-ups, that can cost a team a game, especially if that game is a finals one! But it obviously needs a review and the absolutely most important part is that common sense has to be used by the video ref when adjudicating a play, so that he doesn't have to give BOTD whether a player arm hair or finger nail was touching the ball, or to abolish the friggin blight on the game that is the "torso try"!