www.nrl.com/captains-challenge-t ... fault.aspx maybe we should do this in sl? if this was a rule last night jeffries would have stayed on the pitch after the yellow card when thaler was clearly wrong!

www.nrl.com/captains-challenge-t ... fault.aspx maybe we should do this in sl? if this was a rule last night jeffries would have stayed on the pitch after the yellow card when thaler was clearly wrong!

sounds like a very good idea,yes we got away with that one but when we played leeds away we got penalised for carrying on because the ref thought the ball carrying arm touched the ground and it didnt and probably would of resulted in a try for us.it just goes to show how much refs change games but there only human and make mistakes(too many for my liking)so yes i think this is a good idea

You can't challenge on decisions like that, and the decision would have stood anyway because it was a clear professional foul from Jeffries.
As I suspected, the captains are only allowed to challenge decisions that can be proven (more or less) by referring to a video replay, such as ball steals in the ruck that may be given as knock ons.
Anything that comes down to the referees interpretation (such as the decision to sin bin BJ) can not be argued. How stupid would it look if someone challenged a call like that and the video ref overruled the ref on the pitch? Ridiculous, and is never going to happen.

How long would a game last if they brought this in?

If Childs is the ref? About a week.

All of you who complain incessantly about refereeing decisions must be elated. You would now be able to scream cheat at the video ref for his decision under the captain's challenge.

This.

Jeffries shouldn't have been penalised, but once he was the sin bin was the right decision.

Which would we be appealing? The original decision or the sin binning?

A few years ago it would have been inconceivable to challenge an umpire in a cricket match - yet now they have a limited number of referals for each team.

With modern technology I would think it would be possible monitor 10m at play of the ball - imagine not having to shout "Get em on side"

This thread follows on from Robbie's article in the Times about the game needing to show some more innovation to get media attention.

The game will become like WWF where the content is secondary to the gimmicks.

I hate the way them pandas steal the attention with their on/off breeding and that.

Wouldnt it be simpler to use it the same as the NFL where each team gets say 3 challenges to use throughout the game and if the challenge is correct then they get that challenge back but if the challenge fails the team who made it loses an interchange this would make teams only use they if they believe it is necessary otherwise it would harm their team.

I really don't see the point in this for SL. The NRL has a video ref at every game, we do not. We already have a situation where the referring is different in 2 matches of every round. I wouldn't even consider it until we have a video ref covering all matches.

Am i just imagining it or did SL use to have a VR at every game? But not a big screen

problem would be lack of camera angles at the non sky matches. Most clubs video all their games but only with a single camera. so video refs at non sky matches dont have the multiple angles available that sky provide. to be fair it needs to be all matches non-video ref or all matches video ref using same quality of coverage. Unlikely the latters ever going to happen due to finances.

The ref would need to know who the captain was first. Thaler thought it was Gale.