the point is they didnt ask to be sl refs they were picked . not saying a fan should plucked from the stands

but pick up a whistle go to a local ref soc and start from their and who knows you could be a sl ref one day and all the games will be perfect

so tell us about tj narrow role enlighten me

Touch judges can give input on almost anything through the communication system and quite frequently they do. Many calls which are given by the referee are spotted by the touch judge.

The problem is, many people believe unless the touch judge is running on and waving his flag every five minutes that they aren't doing anything.

If people really think the standards are worse now than in the past few years they need their heads checking. Start of 2008 (I think) was by far the worst I've seen it, pretty sure they set some records for penalties at that point. By comparison at the moment they are doing a reasonable job.

Rugby League is not an easy thing to officiate, no matter how good you are. Many of the rules (or standard interpretations) leave in a lot of ambiguity, the nature of contact makes it very difficult to see what goes on in the tacke, and an awful lot of things are marginal (etc...)

I'm also totally for video refs checking that tries are legitimate - even if it can be frustrating at times it is far more annoying to see an inadequate check give a try and then 30 seconds later proof it shouldn't have been given... Also wouldn't be against better usage of the man upstairs during general play just as much as the touch judges to be honest.

They're full-time, it's their job. You make it sounds like they didn't have a choice. The biggest problem at the moment is a complete lack of consistency in interpretation etc and the blame should be pointing firmly at the door at Cummins for that.

still waiting for deano g reply

I personally don't have a problem with how the VR was utilised on that occasion. For a start, it was a particularly long play so it's reasonable for the decision to be longer than usual. It also occurred as the last play of the game and one which decided the winner so not only was it important to get it right but there was no need for a quick decision as the game was over. The only thing that bamboozles me is fans who think the default position should be "try" and that attack errors or good defence shouldn't be recognised accordingly.


Why would it ever be ok to award a try where a player has scored from a double movement, knock on, obstruction, or hasn't actually put the ball down?




I don't buy the idea that on field officials would fare any better than the VR. In fact I'd go as far as to say that a referee sending a decision upstairs is a pretty clear indication of what [ihe[/i thinks of his own ability to get a particular decision correct.

I agree with Cruncher's earlier post. VR's should not be allowed to take a look at every little bit of play leading up to a try. They should only look at what the referee on the field tells them to look at. Looking at anything else kind of undermines the ref anyway

so everybody who works in the same work place all do exactly the same because the boss told me. never in a million yrs do we all work the same do the same even if our boss told us too because were human and we al;l do things slightly different

Really? So your saying inconsistent ref's are ok because everyone does things differently? Your having a laugh

no what am saying ur never going to get perfect

Why would it be undermining the ref? They both have their own jobs to do, as long as each are doing their respective jobs as well as they can, and only the best people we can find making it to the top games, there doesn't seem to be a place to complain beyond the odd one off annoyance post match.

Obviously no one can be perfect. We want improvement, which would mean more consistency

Touch judges do have a narrow role compared with football assistant referees (the name kind of gives away their higher status!).

You may not like it, but this is what the laws say:

"Enforce Laws 2. The Referees shall enforce the Laws of the Game and may impose penalties for any deliberate breach of the Laws. He shall be the sole judge on matters of fact except those relating to touch and touch in-goal (see para. 11 below)."

We have one ref in RL and subordinate officials.

Except in the NRL, where they have 2 refs, but hey, what do they know about RL? They're obviously as wide of the mark as me...





I haven't listened to the intercom but I have stood by pitchside many times over the years and I have not witnessed the kind of high quality and frequent interaction between TJs and referees that you believe goes on. If that happened regularly you would expect referees to pause before making the decisions on knock-on or ball steal to hear what the TJ had to say, instead you have the referee instantly making a judgment call, which is often wrong (or failing to see something, such as missing forward passes).

We saw a lot of that on Sunday and it isn't fair to single Silverwood out.

and even if they were perfect everytime u lot would still be moaning

Given the extremely defensive attitude you've taken we can only assume you have some vested interest in the refereeing community. Given the ludicrous response above is it any wonder fans and coaches scratch their heads when they don't know from week to week how the ref is going to interpret the laws and guidelines of the game.

You were doing well, now you lost the arguement... The inconsistancy is noticable. I hope you are reffing at SL level soon so you can put things right...

never ref a game in my life and never intend to because no matter how hard u tried there is allways people to slag you off ,cheat ,liar dont know the rules and many more offensive ones that u may have used

Whats the point in the ref asking the VR to look at a specific incident if the VR will nit pick at every little thing and watch the same clips over and over hoping to see something?

Take the incident when Hansen (i think it was) was pulled up for obstruction. What if the ref on the field had deemed it to be legal, but then the VR disagrees and announces in front of the whole stadium that it was offside.

Ahhh. So let's forget the rules, which support my argument, as does the position in Australia. Its the "reality" that matters. Your "reality".

so the ref never gets a call from the tj or even changes his mind with info the tj gives him

Asking them to look at a specific incident allows them to skip straight to that point if there's no suspicion elsewhere - if when getting to that point you notice something blatantly wrong that should strike off the try, what do you do - ignore it?

As for the VR announcing that the ref was wrong? Good. Shows we care more about playing to the rules than feeding an ego. But a word in the ear would obviously be the best way to let a man in the stands help the man on the field. The big screen is obviously just a showpiece for the fans/sky.