There’s a very simple and built-in way to overcome the on-going howlers made by rugby league video refs: appoint the Channel Nine commentary team to do the job.
There’s no way Ray Warren, Peter Sterling, Phil Gould, Wally Lewis, Brad Fittler, Darren Lockyer and Andrew Johns could possibly make a mistake with slow-mo replays.
That’s if Channel Nine execs don’t knock the idea as placing too much extra pressure on the team that might affect their capacity to call.
That would be an unrealistic response. The commentary team watch exactly the same footage as the current video refs, and make comment en route on air, so why not give them the full bottle?
If seven is too unwieldy, make it Gould and Lewis to make the decisions. They are the among the best analysts of the code.
And to appease the Queenslanders who accuse NSW of running the game, Lewis takes care of that problem with New South Welshman Gould.
Rugby league footballers, coaches, fans, fringe-dwellers, and the media, have all had a gutful of the obviously wrong decisions that continue to rise.
Take Sean Hampstead as a prime example. He’s been demoted three times this season for decision howlers as a video ref. How many times must he be flicked to no longer have the job?
There are alternatives to the commentary team.
Referee boss Bill Harrigan and his side-kick Stuart Raper should have the job on Sunday. Harrigan was the best ref in both rugby codes since he made his first grade debut in 1986. After 392 first grade games, 10 grand finals, 21 Origins, and 25 Tests nobody is better qualified.
Still not sure what qualifications Raper has to be a refereeing guru. After a limited career as a player, and 127 games coaching Castleford and a short time coaching the Sharks.
But he is Harrigan’s 2IC, and that’s a good enough reason why he should be there assisting on Sunday.
Another alternative is make the most of former players like Max Krilich, and Gary Jack, to name just two of many possibilities, to be video refs.
They have the football nous to make the job work.
And it’s not difficult, just plain common sense and use of technology. It’s a simple process.
One fact for certain, any alternative is better than the current one.
But I still stick to my Channel Nine suggestion, all wrapped up in one neat and tidy parcel.
SportsFan
Roar Rookie
They are commentators not Referees.
Meesta Cool
Guest
Good suggestion Mike.. but I think it is time to rid ourselvsof the Slo mo replays. If a fumble can't be seen in real time, then a try should be awarded.. I am sick of this ' fingertip and torso put downs argument'.. a try is when the ball is firmly in the attackers hand and is 'planted' on the grass.. no need to look any further.-- The ball touching the fingertip, torso or rolling down an arm is not a ball under control!. EASY.-- NO TRY!
Sparks
Roar Rookie
13th? You're being rather generous!
Meesta Cool
Guest
I have a suggestion David.. Put two journos in the box, when you read hei articles, they are always condemning the refs, SO, they obviously would do a better job!... Maybe the Ref's could then do 'job awap' and we would get a more balanced reporting if games...
Bee Bee
Guest
Agree. What happened to Voss. He was a breath of fresh air. Hadley's terrible. Lockyer needs throat surgery, Vautin has never recovered from his head injury and needs to retire. Johns' and Fittler's brain's failed to develop beyond their 13th birthday. Sterlo makes good observations but is drowned out by too many Boofheads as you wonderfully describe them Turbo. Thank God for Roy and HG on Sunday... Now I just have to find my radio.... Seeya Boofheads.
Boomshanka
Guest
Eddie McGuire would be perfect for the video refs box. With his expert opinion and knowledge from a game were fumbling the ball and loose carries are commonplace, we'd have heaps more tries awarded.
Boomshanka
Guest
Horatio I'm in no pain, thanks for your concern. Yes Messers Browne and McGuire may still be around (albeit increasingly irrelevant once the auditors come knocking), but Nines current predicament is Karma to me. For the record, I've warmed a little to Gould as he appears to be the only one who is above the cross promotion nonsense (I've never heard him promote "House Husbands or "The Voice" etc during a game - however he still remains guilty and unpunished for promoting the pro gambling lobby late last year).
turbodewd
Roar Guru
I would love to swap the video refs and the Channel 9 commentators! That would rock beyond belief! Im over Ray 'fuddy duddy' Warren. Im over Angry Phil Gould and Im over Boofhead Fittler. Give Hampstead and Harrigan the microphones! :^)
Keith Chekhov
Guest
David's right in that something had to be done as an interim measure until next season. Harrigan's mob are too far gone. Their decision-making ability appears to be completely and irretrievably corrupted by 'benefit of the doubt' and all the rest. They can no longer be trusted to make sensible decisions every time (though the on field refs are doing very well). As a quick fix, the Channel 9 mob would be as good as any. Sure, it would come across as a bit odd, almost certainly unprecedented in world sport, but it would be an amusing one-off for the grand final. Obviously it couldn't be a permanent thing for a host of reasons, not least Nine's intimate association with the gambling industry. A bookmaker participates in the half time rundown for heaven's sake! But why not just install some intelligent ex-players (who don't have commentary commitments) and tell them to call it as they see it, unencumbered by any pre-ordained guidelines on how to make the decision. Geez there must be hundreds of options. All you'd have to do is teach them how to use the equipment. Perhaps therein lies the benefit of using the Channel Nine commentary box. You wouldn't have to train them up in the technology!
wally Wilcox
Guest
Why don't we get Eddie Maguire in the video ref's box? Or at least let the video refs have the "phone a friend" option with him on the direct line...
Mick T
Guest
classic.
Australian Rules
Guest
What about the other 5 games that Ch9 don't telecast?
2BB (AKA 2 Bob Billy)
Guest
David said ...."Viewer involvement hearing what two icons of the game are deliberating would be spectacular">>>> One's an icon of the game, the other is a NSW/Channel 9 paid up muppet.
Horatio
Guest
Boom, I understand your pain but some of the same Nine people will still be there no matter who the owner is - McGuire, Browne, Gould etc..,
Sparks
Roar Rookie
Surely you jest, David? Your article's basic premise is knocking the referees by suggesting that commentators take over....
Bee Bee
Guest
This will also show like in cricket and tennis that the on-field officials get the call right a huge amount of the time (on their gut instinct). Takes out the crippling self-doubt that officials are suffering from at present. And it takes out the on field sook factor. (i'm looking at you Manly) I also love when teams fail to review a wrong decision because they also thought the original call was right. It adds a wonderful dimension to the game.
Bee Bee
Guest
. Commentators have a big advantage making the call because once they make one they can spend their time convincing the viewer why they have made the right decision. Currently video ref sits in cone of silence while the commentators go to town on them. Why not just put a mike on the video ref like the on field ref so we can at least here their version of events. Also, a ref should never face the task of having to call in the video. Thats just another dilemna they don't need. Captains challenge just like cricket. That way the burden of deciding to review a call is left to captain and on-field ref can focus on making his gut call. Just like in the good old days.
arthur rightus
Guest
The simplest solution is to get rid of the video refs altogether & allow on field officials to actually make a decision. Sure, they will get things wrong, as all players & coaches do, but surely it is easier to cop an error made on the spot as opposed to errors still being made after multiple looks at replays. For this to work the co-operation of Channel 9, Fox & their commentators would need to be sought. They would have to agree that they wouldn't go looking for & highlighting referee mistakes as they currently do & just simply accept their decisions. I remember watching 5 Nations Rugby matches commentated by the late great Bill McLaren who was without peer as a caller of Rugby. Tries would be scored via blatant forward passes & knock on's but Bill never highlighted them, instead focusing on the brilliant play that lead to the try & that's the way it should be.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Im entirely in favour of the idea. If you insist on legalising dissent in cricket, have the commentators make the calls in that as well.
Midfielder
Guest
Planko Thanks for the capital letters ...... however I beg to differ ... reason [old business true-ism] .... if you owe the bank $ 10, 000 and can't pay you are in trouble .... if you owe the bank 3.5 billion and can't pay the banks in trouble .... To assume lenders owed 3.5 billion will not look at every possible cost saving they can get is fanciful .... when we are talking 3.5 billion owed to the banks and other lenders be sure no stone will be left unturned .... Receivership or Administration [which is looking likely if smh & news business pages are correct] will render existing contracts unenforceable in most cases....