That would be Sky then better get on the phone to them and see if they are interested

As good as the thought is - I just can't see happening. Hell, money aside - we'd struggle to even get enough competent officials adjudicating the decisions at all games.

The best proposal I can think of is, clubs using their own cameras/equipment to 'help' officials make a decision. As an example, we're obviously going to have camera crews at our games for hullkr.tv. If there was some way that a replay of a try could be viewed on a monitor by the match official with no/little time lost, then that could work. But, the biggest problem with this concept would be in the integrity of the host club's chosen camera team.

when the original trial took place it was costed at about £300,000 for the season and it was taken to the clubs who themselves decided that in the current financial climate that they didn't want the expense. The trial itself was successful and showed it could be done and work. It was down to the clubs to decide and no matter how much complaining Tony Smith does he knows this.

He also knows that a touch judge cannot chalk a try off. The job of the TJ is purely and simply to judge touch and goal kicks and "Advise" the ref nothing more than that.

If the RFL could get a deal with a production company to provide the equipment and crew, they could possibly recoup their money back via sponsorship with them as well as commission on better quality DVDs sold and possible sponsorship on internet highlights/replays (such as HullFC.tv, HullKR.tv, etc).

The front of the referees' shirts are still not sponsored either.

I like this idea lets tell the rfl

£50k x 13 home games is £650K not £6.5M

Did he mean six-figure number per club or altogether?

I went with £50k x 5 games x 26 rounds = £6.5m per season.

5 games rather than 7 because 2 are already covered by Sky, and 26 rounds rather than 27 because Magic Weekend is televised.

It would have been all together. The clubs wouldnt pay for the video refs, so why would he give the cost per club....i'm with you Wellsy

even sandy has said after talks about refs they should be video at every game see the mail

i think video refs are needed at every game otherwise it isn't a level playing field, even if its with less cameras at games a second look at 'dubious' tries is a must, i don't know the exact numbers but i would imagine Saints, Leeds, Wigan etc will have more games televised than say Salford, Widnes, Wakey etc. which theoretically gives the big teams an advantage too over the season. Dont need a big screen, as someone else said, a red and green light system or even just a word radio'd to the refs ear who could then signal whatever the decision is. I know cost is an issue but with some cameras at every game surely something could be done thats not too astronomical cost wise.

Robot refs, that's what we should have.

Honda could sponsor them and any back chat from players like that idiot Cross last week would result in a Chinese burn.

That'll learn 'em.

sandra you get dafter