It's what the SL needs, but the question is are our refs good enough? Ganson is the best of a very bad bunch. He blows the pea out of the whistle for the first ten but he won't take the soft option. Silverwood is terrible, Roby can't hack it, Robert Hicks doesn't even know why he's on the field. Personally I'd rather every game had a video ref and the 'On Report' system abolished. Our refs are threatening a strike alledgedly with not having good enough management so maybe video refs at every game first?

Two refs has its pro,s & con,s, I watch loads of NRL & they still seem able to mess it up at times, What I do like in the NRL is that the benefit of the doubt has gone & the ref gives his opinion (try or no try) then ask,s the video ref to judge. The new Aus refs boss it apears has issued his instructions as how the game is to be played so at least the press public as well as players know what is required. Somthing that we could use here.

It's not the number of referees that is the issue, it's the calibre of the individuals.

The referees in Super League are all really low level characters as people. They are skinny geeks who no doubt have no friends or social skills. They are not strong enough personalities and not capable of handling the pressure. They really are there simply because no one else wants to be doing it.

Having two of them wouldn't mean they made better decisions, if anything it would probably mean they made more decisions, which I'm not convinced is a good thing.

IMO referees should be former players. They know what happens in games and can judge things a lot better.

I doubt that very much. I'd be sure that you need to be made of pretty stern stuff to be a RL ref or touchie - all the more so in front of ten thousand or more baying fans in major SL games.


relevance? (though Ganson and Hewer would kiss you for that)

...if so, so what? ....

Er, I suspect they do.

Self-evidently, total and utter bollox

Wrong, there are actually loads of lower level RL match officials and there are many who aspire to be a SL ref.

No but it does mean they only have something nearer half the work to do, and the ability which one man can never have, to watch two things in different places at the same time and to be in two places at once. (BTW to be clear I am not convinced that the 2 ref model is overall better, I watch all the NRL games and it seems to work well in some games, but then not so well in others)

There is no bar on former players moving into reffing though. As such, there's no "should" about it. Any that want to be, and are good enough, can be.

Fully agree. I can see why people prefer the 2 ref system compared to one, but can't understand why people bag the SL refs. Yeah, they get decisions wrong now and again, and I'm one of the first to call them on it when it happens, but at least other than their NRL counterparts, they have no issues refereeing a game on their own.

I don't think SL needs the 2 ref system, I just think the officials as a whole need tinkering with. And as for the NRL referees being better than SL referees..........



.

This is an organisation that has the likes of Shayne Hayne, Jarred Maxwell, Ben Cummins, Matt Cecchin and Gavin Badger in their ranks. Simply awful referees. I don't think the NRL have had any decent referees, and I include the retirees like Clark, Mander, Simpkins and that asshat Tony Archer in that list too.

It's the players that make the referees look good. Plus they are biased as hell in internationals.

Is that a self appraisal?

For as long as our game is officiated by men/women there will always be human error. It is unavoidable. How many mistakes do players make during a game? Arguably more than the officials.

I don't think having two refs would achieve anything other than slow the game down. I know plenty of Australians who want to revert to one referee. This is just one of the many NRL misconceptions which get banded about.