At a push you could have the on field ref double as VR, eliminating the need for additional personnel. As you say, each game is now recorded so we are part of the way there.

And you are absolutely right, we need to be pushing forwards with the VR, trying to get all games up to the standard which the VR allows, but there has always been a vocal opposition to the VR which pushes for moving backwards and not utilising the advantage the VR represents.

Ben Thaler allowing Leeds a try at a crucial point when it was as clear an obstruction as you'll get is up there with some of the clangers on display.

We have 3 fully trained and qualified referees, 1 gets 1 look in real time. 2 get time, mutual angles, and slow motion.

For the most difficult decision, when it can't be conclusively proven. We have decided to go with the referee with the least amount of time and information available and under the most pressure in the worst environment.

I corrected you when you repeated a previously corrected mistake. That is not a "difference of opinion". I am not debating with you, I am posting my twopennorth in a public thread. I of course never took any issue with you posting anything but if you were just posting a reply "to someone else" then may I suggest you use the PM system as otherwise we are fooled into thinking you're posting to the forum at large.

Your arrogance is quite amusing. To actually question other posters as to why they keep having an opinion different to yours when you've been so good as set them straight. You have such a transparent and telling need to convince yourself that differing opinions can only come about through a lack of intelligence too don't you? What's that about I wonder...

My opinion on the new VR set up is clearly expressed in my other posts on the subject, so no point keep raking over old ground. I can accept a difference of opinion even if it's an alien concept to you.

I know which challenge I would rather be on the end of! One left the victim slightly miffed for a minute, one left the victim out on the floor with no memory of the game. You're not really living out your sig there.

Is it?

How was Westwood's challenge on a yellow when Ah Van's was red?

Didn't half look like Ah Van knew what he was doing. A clenched fist & swinging arm into the face? Oh yes, clearly accidental. Don't know why you think it was mistimed either, he appeared to time it perfectly. It's not as though Charnley was even dipping.

Accidental? Nah. Mistimed? Nah. Rush of blood? Yep.

I think the RFL have got their assessment of Ah Van right, saying he attempted to tackle but was reckless about the outcome. However, the punishment is harsh. It's a 1-2 match ban and they've given him 2 without taking the red card into account, despite it being issued after only 23 minutes. That's pretty much a 3 match ban for what was just an unfortunate accident, imo.

I thought Ah Van was pretty unlucky tbh. It's a contact sport and sometimes things will go slightly wrong. I'd have binned him and left it at that tbh.

As for the Matty Smith incident, you just can't do that. It was 10 yards infront of me and I knew instantly he'd get a ban. It was petulant and soft and gave Handbury exactly what he'd been looking for all game from a Wigan player (a reaction).

Funniest decision though from the weekend has to be no ban for Ben Westwood! That's unbelievable.

Not seen the Westwood incident yet but the RFL report says contact with the chest.

On the particular point, as explained that's not opinion, you just can't accept that you made a glaring mistake.


So let's close it there, then. Your opinion (I hope I have this right)Referees operate in a realm of absolute certainty. If there is any area of doubt in any decision, then they are unable to call it. The fact they do so on a second-by-second basis is terribly unfair. When they have the luxury of a VR then they should use it at every opportunity so that at least for one game, some of the poor loves' terminal inability to make calls is eliminated. If there's a VR, it's cruel to still have the ref indicate his decision, downright inhumane. he shouldn't be put through this.[/i

My opinion"I am 100% sure X happened"[/i! He makes decisions, non-stop, thousands of 'em, and I would guess is "certain" about very few. If any. But, his years and thousands of hours of experience however empower and equip him to very confidently make these decisions, and so he does. He makes the call. Every call. And if it is a highly contentious call and he is really struggling then he [istill[/i makes the call, giving the benefit of the doubt to whichever side the rules and his training indicate he should.

My opinion is your opinion is rubbish, and I note you go [iad hominem[/i as you can't argue against what I have explained, but I'll defend to the death etc. your right to have your rubbish opinion. OK?

To some degree, yes; but you wrongly state Ah Van's action was "accidental", it wasn't, it was reckless, and there's a world of difference.

I'd have sent Smith off personally, for being a grub and for doing something that has no place in the game, but the potential for injury of what he did was almost nil, whereas in Ah Van's case the potential if he contacted the head was extremely high and likely to be serious.