Bring in the captain's challenge Todd – it’ll shut the whingers up

There are few things worse than watching your side lose because of a wrong decision – or non-decision – made by the officials.

It is an issue as old as the game itself and it doesn’t seem to be going away. In spite of the institution of more refs, video replays and the bunker, the cry of the angry supporters who feel they have been robbed is as much of the game now as it has ever been.

If you’re side gets the benefit of that poor call you are inclined to tell those screaming “injustice!” to “suck it up” and “look at the scoreboard.”

If you are one of the supporters on the rough end of the pineapple those sentiments inflame your impotent and white hot rage.

And then we start to whinge. Some of us never stop.

Some are still annoyed that Brett Kenny wasn’t awarded a vital try in the 1984 grand final. How about Steve Mortimer at dummy half diving over the back of the man playing the ball to score a decisive try on the final day of the 1985 season against the Dragons?

I know some Balmain supporters who still aren’t over Bruce McGuire being penalised by Bill Harrigan in the 1989 decider – not to mention Terry Lamb taking out Ellery Hanley in the previous year’s finale.

What about Jarryd Hayne being penalised for a double tackle on Billy Slater in the 2009 Grand final when the Storm player clearly dropped the ball cold? How about the seemingly constant string of decisions that stood between the Cowboys and getting to grand finals?

Look at the scoreboard you losers and get over it.

(Digital Image Grant Trouville © nrlphotos.com).

But you know what? More than one of those decisions (or non-decisions) were wrong (I’ll let you decide which ones) and could strongly be argued to have cost teams victory.

In Round 26 of the 2016 season the NRL trialled a system that could put a stop to some of those kinds of incidents. However, following the trial of the Captain’s Challenge in the Dragons-Knights game at Kogarah Oval, the concept has completely disappeared from the agenda.

If Todd Greenberg and Tony Archer want to lift the pressure on the Bunker and their officials, a Captain’s Challenge could be just the thing to do it.

It might also stop the likes of me whinging.

Since that trial on Saturday 3 September there have continued to be incidents that, if reviewed, could have changed the results of matches. Here are just a few.

Qualifying Final 1, Friday 9 September 2016. Broncos versus Titans
The Broncos were up 20-18 in the 50th minute and James Roberts had been tackled in the attacking 20. When he got up to play the ball he is clearly seen to kick Titans player Ryan Simpkins.

Simpkins appeals to the referees but play goes on and Alex Glenn scores.

With the aid of a captain’s challenge the try would have been overturned and Roberts either sin binned or dismissed. The odds would have become very good that the Titans win the game.

Qualifying Final 2, Saturday 10 September 2016. Raiders versus Sharks
In the 60th minute of this very tight match Josh Papalii made a break up the middle of the ruck. He gets the ball away to Jarrod Croker who is tackled by desperate defence five metres out. Kurt Baptiste ignores a three-on-one overlap to the right and goes himself. He is brought down by two blatantly offside Sharks players but Matt Cecchin orders a hand over.

With the benefit of a captain’s challenge the Raiders would have received a penalty directly in front of the sticks, and very possibly a Sharks player would have gone to the sin bin.

In a game won by two points, with a week’s rest a stake, how crucial that would have turned out to be can only be speculated upon. The Raiders should have at least received a penalty.

State of Origin 1, Wednesday 31 May 2017. Queensland versus NSW
In the 48th minute of Origin 1 with the scores at 12-4 to NSW, Matt Gillett is clobbered in a high tackle.

Replays clearly show he cops a forearm across the mouth. No penalty is awarded. Ironically Gillett is penalised moments later for tackling a virtually landed James Tedesco in the air.

Off the back of the resulting penalty to NSW Tedesco scores the try that ends the game as a contest.

With the benefit of a captain’s challenge Queensland is on the attack courtesy of a deserved penalty with a fresh set of six up their sleeves. If Queensland score at that point do their heads go up and the Blues heads go down? Again, one can only speculate. But Queensland should have had the penalty.

(AAP Image/Dave Hunt)

NRL Round 13, Sunday 4 June 2017. Sea Eagles versus Raiders
Now, I’d be lying if I – as a Raiders supporter – didn’t admit to there being some sour grapes in this. Last weekend’s loss at Brookvale was the third game in recent history that the Raiders have lost to the Sea Eagles in controversial circumstances.

In the second minute of golden point extra time Junior Paulo made a powerful wide run from his own 22. With Jarrod Croker looming up in unmarked support the ball comes free. The officials rule the ball was dropped.

Manly receive the ball from the ensuing scrum and Daly Cherry-Evans coolly slots the winning field goal.

With the benefit of a captain’s challenge the replay would have showed that the ball was clearly stripped with two in the tackle. The Raiders would have received the penalty and been on the attack. Who knows what the result would have been?

(AAP Image/Dan Himbrechts)

When the captain’s challenge was trialled last year it didn’t end up being used by either sides leader during the game. That was very likely a product of the game that it was trialled in. The Knights were going to come last and the Dragons couldn’t make the eight.

There was nothing at stake.

This was precisely the wrong sort of match to trial the system. By its very nature the captain’s challenge will be used when a team believes they’ve copped the rough end of a decision – or non-decision – that has severely dented their chances of prevailing – and it really matters that they prevail.

Further, the parameters that the NRL trialed were a good start but too narrow. They were as follows.

The captain’s challenge can only be used to challenge a try or no-try ruling. Captains will have 20 seconds following a try/no-try decision to challenge the decision.

No replays either at normal speed or in slow motion, will be shown on a big screen at the ground until the time allowed for requesting of a captain’s challenge has elapsed.

A captain may request a review of any try or point-scoring decision made by an on-field official in relation to: groundings, knock-ons, obstruction, double movement, offside, touchline /touch-in-goal/dead-in-goal, tackle in the air, steals involving two or more defenders, foul play, as well as goals and field goals.

(AAP Image/Darren Pateman)

The problem with limiting captain’s challenges to these narrow criteria is that not all incidents that define games happen just within the try scoring play. As with the examples above, it is often the penalty that wasn’t awarded, or the ball that was incorrectly ruled stripped – or dropped – that enables an opposition to get in a position to score that they wouldn’t otherwise have been.

Further, there has been lots of praise for the referees in Origin 1 for only awarding six penalties all up. Just like in grand finals, lots of people like the referees to be invisible in Origin games and there is lots of pressure on them to swallow the whistle.

However, as with the Gillett example above, that can lead to penalties that should have been awarded not being given. These can be sliding doors moments.

With these factors in mind I have some additions to make in regards to the captain’s challenge:

It should be used to challenge any call made by an official during the course of a match. It should be used to have any incident either missed or allowed to go by the officials (foul play/ breaking of rules/ errors) reviewed during the course of a match. Captains should have 20 seconds to request a review with any of the four officials.

Referees should be able to choose to allow the play to continue until a natural stoppage before progressing the review (so a review cannot be used as a means to halt a team’s progress). The nature of the challenge must be specific (for instance knock on, strip, blocking kick chasers, offside, player held back, high tackle, eye gouge, tackled in air, etc).

If an incident that has not been specified by the captain is seen during the review process, it can only be used to uphold the captain’s challenge if it involves foul play.

If there is no conclusive evidence to support a challenge then it should be rejected. If the evidence does support the challenge, then the referee will take play back to where the incident occurred and rule accordingly.

If the challenge is upheld, the captain should be able to make another challenge. If the challenge is rejected, he will not be able to make another challenge.

Both teams will have one challenge each during golden point extra time.

(AAP Image/Richard Wainwright)

These rules put the onus on the captains to use the challenge judiciously. They will use it under two circumstances: when they are certain a decision that has gone against them was wrong and when it is the business end of the match and decision is crucial.

Further, ensuring each side has a challenge in golden point extra time means that sides can question whether the defenders who charged down that drop kick were ever actually on side. Can you imagine golden point where offside became a rule again?

Mistakes are still going to be made and supporters of vanquished teams will still cry injustice. However, the captain’s challenge might just stop lots of us having a whinge come Monday at work.

So come on Todd and Tony, get the captain’s challenge back on the table.