I myself feel that there should be video refs at all super league games . purely as a level playing field .
I also feel that we should take a big leaf from the NRL , they have he aformentioned and 2 video refs to adjudicate the decisions with a very high percentage of correct decisions ....Any thoughts?

The NRL has 2 video referees, yet they are still prone to errors. You have the technology at your disposal, you have the option of super slow motion replay, multiple camera angles. There shouldn't just be a "high percentage" of correct decisions, there should be a correct rate of 100% for decisions.

The way errors are being made, people are calling for the Video Referee to be scrapped and let the referee and touch judges make the ultimate decision. I can see where these people come from. The VR seems like an easy way out for the referee and the TJ's seem to do bugger all anyway. At least they might buck up their ideas if they are to be given more responsibility.

It's too much cost to have the VR at all games, especially as only two are televised each weekend.

should be at all games or none.

yeh all or none. i feel like catalan have an advantage as they have a video ref at every home game!!! ...... we don't have to have a tele, just someone there to view the hiffy tries. but saying that if it's ganson video reffing, theres no point having one because he still gets it wrong even when he has video evidence hahahaha. i'm all for it though

I'd prefer it to be at all games but the cost is probably prohibitive, but I'd rather have it at some than none.

What I'd like to see is the ability for the ref and the video ref to actually have a dialogue about the decision rather than the ref just pass the buck, for the VR to be available to be called for any aspect of the build up to a try (forward passes etc) and a time limit on decisions. If the ref/refs can't decide after a set time period, say 3 mins, then it's obviously too close to call, and benefit of the doubt goes to the DEFENDING team.

I used to feel the same but my opinion has changed recently. Both sides play under the same conditions whether that be with or without a VR. It's not as if Hull KR played with a VR on Saturday and Hull FC didn't... then again!

This, end of thread.

It's not the cost of the video ref that's prohibitive, it the cost of having enough cameras to provide the images that the video ref would need to view.

I'm not keen on video referees to be honest, I appreciate that they are beneficial in some circumstances but on the whole they slow play down and are just as capable of creating controversy. Amateur referees are expected to make decisions straight away, it is really annoying when their full time counterparts overly rely on the VR.

Silvertail, I would say that Australia has had far more problems with the VR in recent years, from the top of my head last year NSW lost game one, Wests missed out on the 8 and NQ Cowboys were knocked out of the play offs thanks to baffling cock ups from the video referees. At the end of the day there will always be human error whatever they do.

Interestingly, I was told the other day that a few refs went to a training session up at Padgate Campus and had a go at officiating using the two ref system. The jury is still out on that for mine.

Not sure that's true as most of the time the play has stopped anyway.



Can be frustrating, but then we are screaming for their heads when the give a decision without going to the screen, when a Saints player doesn't ground the ball.

I like cricket, and they seem to know how to use the technology to the sport's advantage. I like the review system where if the umpire has got a decision wrong and it's overturned, all accept he is human makes mistakes, and some things are difficult to judge. Perhaps it's not the system that needs to change, it's the fans.

Using the Cricket example is a great shout. That way the video ref can intervene as and when he feels the ref has got it wrong.....maybe....for example.......on forward passes??

I still think they should consider the ref actually being the video ref. On Saturday the ref called for a VR decision on the offside. He knew what "he wasnt sure about". He knew who it was "that he had doubts on". Let there be an engineer who moves the camera/tape BUT let the match ref make the decision.

I don't get this level playing field argument. It has no relevance to other games that some have VR, the important thing it is the same for the 2 clubs within the same game. Where would you stop with the level playing field argument? every game having to be played in the same weather conditions as all the others, same referee as the other games same dimension pitches, same ratio of opposing supporters. The VR is both the same advantage and disadvantage for both the teams within their game.

Sorry what I meant was all the standing about while the VR makes a decision is what annoys me. I quite like the system that Dan Anderson has introduced in the NRL this year, where the referee indicates whether he thinks it should be given or not.