Quote ="Roy Haggerty"You may be in a minority, but I'm in the same minority with you. Utterly pointless rule. If the video ref sees something which contradicts the on-field ref's indication, then it's the video ref who will have the final say. It would be bizarre to do otherwise. That is exactly the same as now. Strange and useless rule.'"
To play devil's advocate, the video referee is only there at games shown on Sky. If a referee is unsure of a decision on a TV game he has the luxury of the video referee to make the decision for him. However, if the same incident from the same game wasn't shown on TV, the referee would be forced to make his own call...
By forcing the referee to make judgement first, it makes it more consistent across the board as the video referee is only able to go against the referees call if it can be clearly proven his decision is incorrect. It also means the referee still has a decision to make rather than taking the easy way out and handing things on to video red.
I personally think it's a good idea and will make it a lot more consistent (especially as video refs are only there at 2 games each week)
