Should Rugby League Adopt the tennis 3 challenges approach , a captain could ask for the video ref to make the call if unhappy with ref decision and if its in his teams favour gets to keep his 3 challenges if not loses 1.
Or just have 2 challenges.
It would mean the ref wouldn't be able to bottle out of making a decision.
There are many pros and cons that i can think of like what about the times the ref goes to the screen for 40/20.
The reason i mention this is because it's becoming more unclear to me when the video ref can be used and when it can not, are there any rules to say when it can not be used?
I know in american football they used to go to the video ref a lot to the point the game got far too slow, i don't know what they do now but american football has got much faster.

I know this was being trialed in one if the Australian reserve leagues last year, perhaps JB or someone can shed some light on how it worked.

It's an interesting thought but it is regularly abused in tennis where a player knows the call is out but still challenges, probably to time waste (and I wouldn't want to see a team deliberately attempt to take a breather by such a method). Same thing happens in Cricket where a player who may be clearly out does the same. Also, the danger in getting a close call wrong in cricket (does happen when you see the ball hitting the stumps on the graphic but the decision is back to the umpire's "not out" call) means a team may genuinely have a call but have run out of appeals and this is due to the fact that they had a geniune call that was previously dismissed and they now have no right to appeal.

I think it could be good for a captain to ask for it in the event of foul play and for the VR to make a decision where the ref normally bottles and puts something on report. That way we might see players not getting away with foul play during a game in a manner they do at the moment due to the refs not disciplining properly. That said if a captain bitches about foul play and nothing is found through his appeal (I would limit them to two) then maybe it would also put the captain on the spot as to his own integrity.

I like video ref as it is. The 3 call rule should apply to talking to the ref about a decision in general play.

Can the video ref just radio down to the referee anyway to advise on calls, with the ref asking him to look at it?
In the event of a possible knock on, we see 4 replays by the time both teams have formed a scrum, is the video ref not able to just radio down in that time and say the ball had actually been stripped or something?

Or 1 challenge In each half for each team, has to be a penalty if the call is adjudged to stand, if the call in American football fails then the team is charged a timeout. Also every scoring play in AF is reviewed by the officials, would that not be better instead of the video ref being used to only check certain scoring chances.

Any challenges by the captain should not stop the ref's/TJ's calls.

I guess that a lot of calls will be about forward passes. I am still keen that any suspected forward passes leading to tries should be tested by the video ref. But first make sure that the ref's/TJ's (and particularly the commentators) understand the rule relating to momentum of the ball - all passes must leave players hand in a back/flat direction!

I know there are arguments about camera angles misleading players, officials and spectators but at least the video can help to give some guidance.

IMO the whole video ref thing is a joke.
It takes a high speed collision sport and literally micromanages it.
Let the match officials make the calls. Yes they will make mistakes, just like players, coaches and fans.
It's an uneven playing field in this country because all the games are not covered to broadcast standard and certain teams get more coverage than others (whether it is an advantage or disadvantage is open to interpretation )
I just hate watching a fast flowing open game coming down to a microsecond of blurred video after 2 minutes of indecision. That is not sport!