It`s nigh on impossible to judge a forward pass and get it bang on all of the time..someone is always aggrieved no matter what you do, if a player passes the ball full on backwards, with hip movement, hand movement but the wind blows the ball forwards and it goes over your so called line is it a forward pass because the ball has travelled forward.

If a player passes ball sideways and is running backwards so the catcher overruns him is that a forward pass..the player has just run onto a flat pass ala whitings to shaul.

To judge a forward pass bang on the ref.tjs have to be bang in line with the pass, look at the angle of the hands etc, while moving himself..so its impossible.
You could call 4 forward passes in a game and get them all wrong and be called biased etc, or miss all 4 and be called the same by the oppo teams` fans/players.

People should stop slagging off refs and if they think they can do better and dare take the stick then give it a go, if they havent got the guts to do it dont slag off someone who has.

I'd like to see the vr gone tbh. For me it hasn't worked. Slow the game down and often refs will look for reasons to not give tries. For example a player grounds the ball perfectly well and would be given if viewed in real time but we'll spend five minutes stood like chips while the vr slows it down to the point where he can show that for a fraction of 100th of a second there was a nanometer of separation between hand and ball.

There's a similar debate going on in cricket about the use of DRS and I can see your point about the focus on millimetres of separation. But the genie's out of the bottle as far as technology is concerned. If they scrapped the VR, Sky would still use the technology to highlight incorrect decisions. We'd still get numerous repeats of incidents and will spend most of the week after games listening to coaches and fans complaining about how they were robbed.

I don't necessarily agree that it encourages refs to not give tries. One thing that the technology has shown is just how good the players are at scoring in seemingly impossible positions. 20 years ago tries were routinely disallowed if there was any suggestion that the ball hadn't been properly grounded. Nowadays refs are much more inclined to believe that a player managed to get a legitimate touch on a ball a fraction of an inch before it went dead.

When it comes down to it though, it doesn't really matter if [ievery[/i single decision is correct or not, and let's be honest - one thing the video has proved is that the vast majority of decisions [iare[/i correct. Fine, we all sit at games and moan about the ref and always will; it's part of being a fan, but the only thing which really matters, well, there are two things actually, which are that [1] the referee gives an honest opinion and [2] the players accept that opinion and get on with the game. That, after all, is the situation we've had for nearly all the whole time rugby league [and every other sport] has existed. I don't remember it being [ithat[/i bad.

There have always been calls for consistency and decisions being 'right', which has led us to the video - to be honest I think we should be more careful what we wish for.

A lot of talk about refs and their video counterparts, but I must admit for several years i have wondered what the two guys running the touchline do? Two extra pair of eyes which rarely seem open.

You and me both, if they are just touch judges to adjudicate if a player goes into touch why is it when the ref asks them in the build up to a try do they have blanks looks on their faces and also why are they level with the play (one following the attacking line and the other the defensive) can they very rarely see the offsides even when they are totally blatant, and as they are running the touch line following the play can they never see forward passes, fair enough some are 50/50 and if the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking side so be it but some are ridiculous may aswel be watching the NFL.