There's a good column by Daniel Anderson on NRL.com about the refereeing controversies in Origin One. He particularly takes aim at the standard of Video Refereeing in today's game, specifically mentioning the Mortimer no try on the weekend.
"For me, if there is one area of officiating that really grates me, it is the video ref. I enjoy and expect that we use the technology available to make a better informed decision on try scoring plays and areas of foul play (Ask Andy Carroll at Liverpool if he would appreciate some goal line technology in the World Game). But I do not understand why some video ref officials need to extract or fashion an interpretation from what appear to be different threads of rules in our game.
Greg Inglis lost the ball over the line. 99 percent of viewers saw this happen. Whether Robbie Farah “initiated contacted with the ball in the act of scoring a try” does not seem relevant even if correct. I saw GI drop the ball over the line = NO TRY.
If this incident occurred at the 50m line, do we seriously think the referee would restart the tackle count?
I watched Daniel Mortimer denied a try against Manly. Does the video ref feel the pressure to deliver the one percent interpretation? Are they conscious that their decisions may be setting precedents? It’s not a court of law, it’s a sport. Can’t we go with the 99 percent interpretation?"
http://www.nrl.com/still-singing-the...6/default.aspx
In the words of Paul Gallen, video refereeing is out of control.
"For me, if there is one area of officiating that really grates me, it is the video ref. I enjoy and expect that we use the technology available to make a better informed decision on try scoring plays and areas of foul play (Ask Andy Carroll at Liverpool if he would appreciate some goal line technology in the World Game). But I do not understand why some video ref officials need to extract or fashion an interpretation from what appear to be different threads of rules in our game.
Greg Inglis lost the ball over the line. 99 percent of viewers saw this happen. Whether Robbie Farah “initiated contacted with the ball in the act of scoring a try” does not seem relevant even if correct. I saw GI drop the ball over the line = NO TRY.
If this incident occurred at the 50m line, do we seriously think the referee would restart the tackle count?
I watched Daniel Mortimer denied a try against Manly. Does the video ref feel the pressure to deliver the one percent interpretation? Are they conscious that their decisions may be setting precedents? It’s not a court of law, it’s a sport. Can’t we go with the 99 percent interpretation?"
http://www.nrl.com/still-singing-the...6/default.aspx
In the words of Paul Gallen, video refereeing is out of control.
Comment