timesonline.typepad.com/rugby_le ... entry.html

timesonline.typepad.com/rugby_le ... entry.html

I think what he says is fair enough but I like the theatre of the break in play and looking at the replay, it builds some excitement, and gives the players some time to get their breath back so they can come back with more intensity.

When people say its boring because of breaks in play, that would only be the case if the fans couldn't see the screen and argue about whether or not it was a try.

I think if technology is there then it should be used, I reckon in cricket they should use it for LBWs, there would be a lot more wickets given.

If we stop televising games then i would agree with not having video refs, but since that is not going to happen thn we should keep them as the controversy each week would be unbearable. That said we need to be able to trust the vid refs to make the right call or at least be consistant (Mathers and Mcguire last night)

I have to agree.
People used to assume the VR was the be all and end all, but reality is that it is still a human pressing the buttons and human error can still happen.

I said a few years ago when the whole Benefit Of Doubt was creeping into fashion that if there [iis[/i doubt, then the VR is being counter-productive.

What if, say, the VR judges it's a knock on, but the ref on the pitch thinks it wasn't? Can he over-rule the VR?
I think we'd be much better having an NFL-esque situation where the ref on the pitch can have a quick look at a video replay and make a decision if we have to have something.

Such as is the case for over 50% of us South Standers at the HJ!! While it is very frustrating, Ihave to admit though that it isn't usually too boring waiting for the decision.