Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Morkel, post: 2596506, member: 8215"] This will be almost a cut & paste from my previous rants on the topic. And I will continue to loudly voice my opinion because it seems to fucking obvious to me yet the NRL just gets dumber. Remember the catalyst for this bullshit was Foran's "Hand of God". For those who don't remember Foran knocked a ball on mid-air yet Manly were still awarded a try via "benefit of the doubt". It ended the Cowboy's season. What happened then was the BOD ruling was used to excuse anything but a 100% no-try. Foran looked to have knocked on, but they couldn't be 100% certain, so it was BOD. IMO, BOD was only ever there to split absolute 50/50 decisions. As an example, true 50/50 BOD would have ruled Copley's try on the weekend as a no-try. He looked to have dropped it, but there was the chance that his right arm, which was tucked in out of view, never lost contact with the ball. It was only a chance though. Call it 25% try, 75% no-try. If it had been ruled like Foran's example, it would get the green light. If it had used BOD in its intended form, it would have been red. And red would have been the correct decision IMO. So to fix this clusterfuck, the NRL went full retard and demanded that every decision had to be ruled by the on-field ref and it was up to the video ref to overturn. Sounds logical in theory, but in practise it was just as loose as before. In that even if it looked mostly like the on-field ref was wrong, unless there's 100% proof to contradict, that refs ruling will stay. The proof that convinces me that this system it totally flawed is this: Had this ruling style been in place, and had the ref called a Try for the Foran example, even though it looked like Foran [I]had[/I] knocked it on, it wasn't 100% proof so it would[I] still [/I]be awarded a try. So really, nothing's changed. IMO, the NRL aren't interested in anything but covering their own arses. All they want to do is put a set of rules in place that protects the refs. Unless you can prove the refs to be 100% wrong, they're right. Even if it's 99% likely they're wrong, they're still right. They go on about the refs needing to be confident in their decisions and them constantly getting derided erodes that confidence, which leads to more errors etc. Well **** that. Artificially skewing their right/wrong calls won't help anyone. Their priority shouldn't be covering themselves, it should be training & developing refs to be fucking up to the standards demanded by a billion dollar sport. I won't even add /rant because I'm sure there will be plenty more to come! [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now