the point is they didnt ask to be sl refs they were picked . not saying a fan should plucked from the stands

but pick up a whistle go to a local ref soc and start from their and who knows you could be a sl ref one day and all the games will be perfect

so tell us about tj narrow role enlighten me

Touch judges can give input on almost anything through the communication system and quite frequently they do. Many calls which are given by the referee are spotted by the touch judge.



The problem is, many people believe unless the touch judge is running on and waving his flag every five minutes that they aren't doing anything.

If people really think the standards are worse now than in the past few years they need their heads checking. Start of 2008 (I think) was by far the worst I've seen it, pretty sure they set some records for penalties at that point. By comparison at the moment they are doing a reasonable job.



Rugby League is not an easy thing to officiate, no matter how good you are. Many of the rules (or standard interpretations) leave in a lot of ambiguity, the nature of contact makes it very difficult to see what goes on in the tacke, and an awful lot of things are marginal (etc...)



I'm also totally for video refs checking that tries are legitimate - even if it can be frustrating at times it is far more annoying to see an inadequate check give a try and then 30 seconds later proof it shouldn't have been given... Also wouldn't be against better usage of the man upstairs during general play just as much as the touch judges to be honest.

They're full-time, it's their job. You make it sounds like they didn't have a choice. The biggest problem at the moment is a complete lack of consistency in interpretation etc and the blame should be pointing firmly at the door at Cummins for that.

still waiting for deano g reply

I personally don't have a problem with how the VR was utilised on that occasion. For a start, it was a particularly long play so it's reasonable for the decision to be longer than usual. It also occurred as the last play of the game and one which decided the winner so not only was it important to get it right but there was no need for a quick decision as the game was over. The only thing that bamboozles me is fans who think the default position should be "try" and that attack errors or good defence shouldn't be recognised accordingly.





Why would it ever be ok to award a try where a player has scored from a double movement, knock on, obstruction, or hasn't actually put the ball down?







I don't buy the idea that on field officials would fare any better than the VR. In fact I'd go as far as to say that a referee sending a decision upstairs is a pretty clear indication of what [ihe[/i thinks of his own ability to get a particular decision correct.

I agree with Cruncher's earlier post. VR's should not be allowed to take a look at every little bit of play leading up to a try. They should only look at what the referee on the field tells them to look at. Looking at anything else kind of undermines the ref anyway

so everybody who works in the same work place all do exactly the same because the boss told me. never in a million yrs do we all work the same do the same even if our boss told us too because were human and we al;l do things slightly different

Really? So your saying inconsistent ref's are ok because everyone does things differently? Your having a laugh

no what am saying ur never going to get perfect