Slightly merging threads here. If you have thrown a bottle onto the pitch during a game then yes you are an idiot, if you haven't then no you are not

Wouldn't dream of it.

I'd ban the clowns for life. Don't drink at games anyway.

I agree with all these but the simple fact is, there aint enough money in RL to support them.

Where is the money from this coming from?


Irrelevant to the current law on forward passes. And if you changed the law to make forward relative to the ground rather than the passing player it would kill the game.


Not a bad idea but there are barely enough refs for one at each game let alone two.


How would that work? Like DRS in Cricket with a limited number of challenges? In any case the ref currently asks for confirmation or clarification from the VR not for the decision to be made as such - try listening to what gets asked.


Examples?


On Report, while over-used IMO, is not used in place of the Sin Bin.


Hmmmmm...



So they are only allowing the VR (TMO) to rule on [iblatant[/i forward passes. The immediate problem there is who decides how blatant the forward pass is?

Oh - and they have the exact same rule on forward passes that we do.

This isn't difficult.

If the VR can see the ball is clearly thrown forward out of the hands then it's disallowed.

If there is any doubt, benefit has to go to attacking side.

Regarding listening to what they ask, asking the VR to "check the grounding" is passing the book.

The on field ref should say, for example, I think Tomkins has grounded that ball before he is in touch. Can you tell me otherwise.

Then if the VR says, well actually Richard, his foot is in touch.

Then the on field ref has had his decision proved wrong.

This is embarrassing.

This is absolutely no different to what happens now. The assumption is that a try has been scored, so when the VR is asked to "check the grounding" - or indeed anything else - he is looking to confirm or deny the decision already made by the on field ref. It's just semantics.

Quite a lot of fans' anger at decisions comes from not actually understanding what is going on and/or the relevant laws.

Which is not to say that I think the current crop of officials are much cop, by the way. But at least focus on the real problems - numbers of referees and training - rather than tinkering with mechanisms that are mostly working as intended.

The problems there, once again, are camera angles and subjectivity.

I think the OP is still a little down about Hull beating his team on Sunday. But lets take one of the incidents which they are moaning about into consideration.

For Rich Whitings try, at first glace, Holdsworths pass appears forward. From a static camera angle, the ball appears to drift forward in comparison to the grass lines on the pitch. The fact is, when you see holdsworths hand position on the ball at the point of passing, he throws it in a backward direction and his own speed inertia is what makes the ball appear to go forward in comparison to the ground.

All of which is irrelevant as its the motion of the ball in comparison to the block chucking it.

I bet Mr Sandercock has signed it. He spends almost as much time moaning about referees as he does looking tired and miserable.

Quote ScottHKR="ScottHKR"Please read the petition linked below, and if you agree and would like to see change, then sign. Thank you. www.ipetitions.com/petition/rlreferees/'" Only if you are prepared to get off your backside and show me how it should be done!!! I will wait till hell freezes over first I think

Quote ScottHKR="ScottHKR"Please read the petition linked below, and if you agree and would like to see change, then sign. Thank you. www.ipetitions.com/petition/rlreferees/'" Only if you are prepared to get off your backside and show me how it should be done!!! I will wait till hell freezes over first I think