Well the NRL season is just four weeks old and already some fans are calling for the bunker to be thrown out with the leftover Easter eggs.
After a number of controversial calls over the last two weeks, the love affair with the bunker has come to an abrupt end. Fans from numerous different teams are claiming their team was robbed while others are clutching at straws trying to justify the video referee’s decisions.
When the bunker was first unveiled late last season, the NRL claimed that it would revolutionise the entire video referee process. There is no denying this claim. However, Todd Greenberg also predicted that there would not be one error made by the bunker this season. This was complete fantasy.
The man in the bunker can have all the cameras in the world, all the gizmos, all the technology available to him, but at the end of the day, the essence of the system remains the same, and it always will. The man making the final decision over what button to press is a human and humans make errors.
It doesn’t matter whether they are sitting deep underground in a fortified, bombproof room or high up in a box at ANZ Stadium, someone still has to make a decision.
Rugby league fans, and the media, have to come to accept this fact. Mistakes will be made, we just need to hope that the video referee is trained up well enough to try and make as few mistakes as possible.
Overall, however, the bunker process is largely an improved system. Some of these improvements seem to be thanks to the fact that the video ref has complete control over camera angles. Some of the improvements also seem to be thanks to changes in the actual process.
Instead of taking 10 or 20 looks at the one camera angle, the video ref is now taking two or three. Sometimes in the old system this was only occurring because the video was waiting for the television broadcasters to make a camera angle available, but largely it was because they were trying to over analyse a situation. This is a good improvement.
The other aspect of the bunker that has come under fire is the actual on-field referee referral process. To many, the problem is that when the on-field referee needs to make a decision, they are guessing. And this guess is largely influencing the video referee’s decision.
While there are instances where the referees have no idea whether they should rule try or no try, most of the time this is not the case. Other than ref-cam, the four officials on the field are closer than any camera and have a better view than any camera can.
It is clear that the current system is not perfect, but the fact is, no system is perfect. Many fans have a desire to see the current system scrapped but they fail to propose an adequate solution.
This system was only introduced in 2013 after the vast majority of fans, players and media hated the old ‘benefit of the doubt’ system. That system had more grey areas than a Sydney rain cloud and fans were constantly left frustrated when trying to figure out how much doubt was needed to shift a decision from no try to try.
Those who long for a return to the ‘old system’ clearly have a very short memory because in no way was it a perfect system. It was far from perfect and in my opinion, a worse system than what we’ve currently got.
When trying to choose a video referee system it is important to understand that there will be doubt in almost every decision sent upstairs, or underground these days. The next step is to consider who to give the benefit of this doubt to when making decisions. Previously it went to the attacking side and we hated it. Now the referees choose who receives the benefit of the doubt.
And why not? They are the closest people to the action. If the referee feels that it is a no try, why shouldn’t the video ref need conclusive evidence to overturn the call? Why should the benefit of doubt go to the attacking team in this situation, even though the referee thinks it’s not a try?
Some have suggested that the referees should make a decision and inform the video referee but no one else. This would protect the on-field referee from the supposed embarrassment of making an incorrect decision. But it would not achieve anything else. We would still be left with rulings being made based on the on-field referee’s decision, exactly as is the case right now.
Instead of pining for a perfect system in which robots determine tries and no tries based on complex algorithms and microchips and lasers and whatever other Jetsons-type technology we hope will exist in the next fifty years, we need to accept that no system is perfect.
We need to accept that the on-field referee will make a decision and the bunker will then determine if there is enough evidence to overturn the decision. If the footage is not conclusive, as it wasn’t in the Roosters game on Saturday night, we just have to accept that we should back the on-field referee’s decision.
Finally, we need to accept that nobody is perfect. Video referees will make mistakes, as they did with Matt Gillett’s disallowed try in the grand final rematch. That’s life. Overall, throughout the course of the season, the bad decisions balance themselves out.
Reckon you can pick the winning team? Build your own dream team with Draftstars daily fantasy and compete on any match. For great odds on the NRL head on over to PlayUp. Imagine what you could be buying instead. Set a deposit limit.
The Parramatta coach was furious with his side after coughing up a first-half lead and going on to lose 44-16 in an embarrassing second-half…
Jamayne Isaako missed five out of nine conversions in a huge win over the Eels - with the Channel Nine team having some fun…
The Eels led 8-4 at half-time. They lost 44-16 in a Dolphins onslaught.
Who is this team and what have they done with the Dolphins? With Wayne Bennett consigned to his sick bed back in Redcliffe, the…
The ball kept falling off the tee for Gutho's penalty kick and the fans were giving him heaps.
The Dolphins were playing with fire on their own line as Kodi Nikorima went for a reckless offload.
