I was looking at the match report on sky and saw a news story saying that the refs now have a twitter account that we can message and they will post reasons for decisions, I can't see that back firing in anyway.

Tweet the ref. . .???! Isn't that what a Warrington once tried doing (in the CC?) <gets his coat>

We're going to get really nuanced answers in 140 characters, I suspect......

Tweets on Tuesday only. @RFLReferees #AsktheRef
Answered each week by 1 referee only.
No guarantee to answer any/all tweets
Will "answer questions about the big gameday decisions, interpretations and general refereeing queries"
Tweets and responses to be posted on the RFL website.

It may only be a PR exercise by the RFL but lets see how it go's
I think "Interpretation" is going to be the biggest issue

This is the problem though, isn't it? You can't even do basic in the [approx] sentence and a half allowed, let alone 'interpretations'.

Basically, it's a good idea spoiled, by the format chosen, which I assume was really more about being seen to be 'trendy' than getting anything illuminating out.

It's a generational thing Bulliac - my son thinks 144 is way too many characters!

However classic responses such as: " I am deaf", "I am blind", "brown envelope", "how far is 10 meters", "What is wrong with passing forward" and "I did not want to separate their relationship" (ptb ed) all easily fit.

I'll give you the fact it explains it - but it only does so if you already know the rule in the first place, and sadly, many don't seem to. If you don't actually know that, only the weight imparted by the passer is taken into account, when deciding on forward passes, then that answer is only going cause confusion; it's at best a part answer which doesn't really explain the rule at all. And let's not forget we've had people on here, who I'd assume to be solid RL fans who don't seem to realise points like this so it's not really a moot point