There is no perfect system but I think I'd go with giving the ref. the option of try/no try/don't know. If he says try or no try/ ... the video ref. has to have have sufficient evidence to over-rule.
Whatever we do believe me it is better than the days without video when all sorts of awful decisions were made.

The game shouldn’t have a “I don’t know” call unless all games at all levels have the ability to review the call…
Or, SL becomes effectively a different sport than RL.

How does a ref in the championship or on a Sunday afternoon BARLA game get a decision when he calls “I don’t know”?

I'm afraid the game without cameras is a different game.
So it is reffed in a different way. I suppose lots of tries are given because "in all probability a try was scored" after consulting with the assistant refs or touch judges.
There is no perfect answer.

TBH I prefer the days of no video ref, yes you are right about shocking decisions made I have witnessed many over the years (Billy Thompson)but it was the talking point after the game. These days there is a lot more anger over decisions made by video refs because even though we can often see it he will go with the live call made by the on field ref.

You are right that there is no perfect answer but I would have at least preferred it if the video refs decision was a standalone and not driven by the on field decision. Let the video refs give is own decision.

March 13, 1983, quarter final

Warrington 4 Hull 10 (T: Phil Ford; DG: Eccles)

Attendance: 11,218

Referee Billy Thompson disallowed three tries.

I was right in front of one of the disallowed try’s and you are right crooked is the only word to describe it. But I would still rather do without video ref in its current format.

I had the pleasure of his company on a jolly boys day out at Elland Road for a GB test v Australia, the coach stopped to pick up a mystery guest en route at Ainsley Top on the M62, and it was him.

He was the half time speaker and was full of it on the journey. From memory, and I'm sure this won't come as a surprise he was quite unapologetic about his Yorkshire bias and his refereeing in general, a case of decisions being made based on meritocracy as he saw fit, with transgressions being let go if the victim was asking for it.

The good old days

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/r ... es-9767295

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/r ... es-9767295

Happy to see the clampdown on the play acting and attempts to get penalties

Absolutely. It was getting silly & needed action. 2 minutes missing game time should do the trick.

I don't understand the drop out thing.

There will be more teams trying to kick short drop outs (i.e just over 10m line). If it fails to reach the ten metre line all that happens is that the kicking team lose the ball rather than a penalty.

As was the case in NRL last year. It reduces the value of a good short kicking game significantly. It might increase Toby King's value immensely.

Not watched the NRL but I'd guess drop outs will suddenly become a contest with lots of collisions. Did that happen?