Quote: Roy Haggerty "As a ref, I think this is completely unnecessary. There are already three officials, which is plenty of eyes to see everything on the pitch. The problem we have is that we simply do not use the touch judges effectively, despite them being wired for communication with the ref.
In my view, it is a simple case of having the ref going back the ten with the furthest TJ from the PTB, and the nearest TJ to the PTB staying level with it to watch for infringements. This allows the referee to effectively police offside, and the ruck is then monitored by the TJ. If the TJ calls foul, then the ref automatically awards it irrespective of whether he saw it or not.
Alternatively, have both TJs retreating 10 meters to mark the line, allowing the ref to stay close to the ruck and police that. If the line moves up too fast, the TJs give the call to the ref who automatically awards a penalty.
Basically, I don't understand why we would need to bring in a second referee to perform a role which could already be performed by one of the two TJs.'"
I've never really understood the reasons for the TJ's current positions and point.
I'd agree the TJ's should hold the line for offside.
In effect given technology nowa days the offside could be automated. I know some will baulk at the idea, but you could easily have 2 markers on the touchline that are automated and move to be 10meters away from the ball. Giving a line at all times, the only issue would be about players infringing on that mark. If it was automatically penalized, watch the fans go from moaning about biased refs, to clammouring for biased refs as the automated system catches too many players breaking the rules.
But I'm getting way ahead of myself, I'd agree ref, watches the play the ball and TJ's marks the offside. WOuld also keep the ref out of the defensive line therefore stop them being used as a possible shepard by smart players.
