sportal.com.au/news-display/two- ... stay-99196 there have been some calls to go back to one ref but for me its improved the game markedly. previously the whole wrestling thing was ruining the game. the pocket referree has cleaned this up. initially both refs shared powers but now there is a controlling ref and the pocket who just watches the PTB/ruck

sportal.com.au/news-display/two- ... stay-99196 there have been some calls to go back to one ref but for me its improved the game markedly. previously the whole wrestling thing was ruining the game. the pocket referree has cleaned this up. initially both refs shared powers but now there is a controlling ref and the pocket who just watches the PTB/ruck

Think it's proved to be a bad thing. The two referee's have two different interpretations of what's a dominate tackle.

To make matters worst this system isn't recognised for International games

the 'shared power' system was never going to work due to different interpretations. however if the system stays as the pocket ref is only an advisor, like a touch judge, then it has a good chance of working & being adopted over here

yeh its been such an outstanding success hasn't it? Surprised they aren't going for three, eventually if they keep adding you think they would be able to get the decisions right the majority of the time!

Lets see:
Head of refs sacked
More bloopers than a bad Sunday evening video outakes show
4 officials (one with video replay) not enough to get it right, add another, oops getting even more wrong
Last few weeks done away with swapping over during games and now just have one dominant ref all game

its hardly made any difference, many would argue its made it worse. oh and its costin prob another million $'s to pay for it.

Is there any LOGICAL reason for there to be two match officials on the park?

Unless this a slow prelude to ..................


























Grid Iron & Flags!!!!


Go Go USA!!!!

No, I don't think so. It's just that the NRL feels is has to be innovative and try to force its changes on everyone else by pushing for them to be regarded as international rules. I have it on good authority that next year it's a toss up between making the ball 10 per cent smaller or reducing the width of the goalposts. The other option of insisting that the grass at every ground was exactly the same shade of green was thrown out, apparently it being regarded as "silly" and "not serving any useful purpose".

What about having two additional posts and doing away with the cross bar? That looks innovative and unusual. The act of scoring tries is too controversial and puts too much pressure on the ref, they should be done away with and instead players should kick the ball between the four posts!

I can't see two refs being brought into SL; we can't get enough SL standard refs as it, how we going to double the amount? I mean Alibert is a ref for christsake!

and you are not

So!!!!

Leaguefan.. you moan and moan about Leeds' tactics yet the one thing that would sort this issue out is 2 referees. Lets get SL to the pace of the NRL using this system, it makes so much more sense

Can I ask you to elaborate on where you get this idea from please and what evidence you have to support it?

I cant belive im going to say this but Alibert isn't the worst ref in SL.
He was but he seems to be finding his feet others have gone backwards.

ONE referee is adequate. if it's good enough for SL and the international game, then it's good enough for the ockers.

Instead, more power should be devolved to the touch judges. What's to stop them looking for the offside, whilst the referee watches the PTB? They're miked up, so it's not as if they can't communicate, is it?

prior to 2 refs it was all chicken wings, and other wrestling moves and the game was becomming boring

the 2 seasons of 2 refs has returned to proper RL.

games in the past were being won by the best wrestlers, not the best footballers.

the nrl just got too fast for one ref.

the 2nd ref is now more like another touch judge, whats wrong with having another set of eyes to watch play

As a ref, I absolutely agree with this. There are already 3 pairs of eyes on the pitch. For me, the areas where I'm likely to miss things or make errors are twofold :

1) When I'm blindsided. Eg - the ball-carrier hits the deck with his back and a tackler between me and the ball. The ball comes loose. I have no way of knowing whether it's ripped or lost, so I always give lost on the grounds that it's the ball-carrier's responsibility to hold on to the ball. Some of those I must be getting wrong. On the rare occasions when touch judges are present, those errors vanish because there's someone watching the blindside.

2) At the PTB. The ref has to do two task at the PTB which require him to look in separate places : the PTB itself to watch for knock-ons, lazy arms etc, and the defensive line to check for offside. Long experience has told me that you have to watch the PTB when it's actually played. But that means you cannot effectively police offside unless you either happen to be right at the side of the pitch so you can see the whole line. Again, if I had a wired-up touchjudge wo could see the whole line, he can simply say "offside 4" in the earpiece, and I can go penalise the centre who's sneaked up on my blindside.

In all other cases, such as a melee on the field, you can call in your touch judges and consult to try and produce the most accurate picture.

Basically, this isn't rocket science. The ref can still retreat 10 metres, but keep his eyes fixed on the PTB knowing the touchies are keeping the players honest. The touchies also watch the tackle so that all angles are covered. I just don't see why we need an extra ref on the field.