It's time to change bunker rule: Fittler

Greenburg quote '' To suggest that a team not playing finals football this weekend is only due to Ref errors is ridiculous and needs to be called out" (what about other weekends?) (examples not about this weekend) OK Toddles, so two teams go head to head over 80 minutes in a finals game and they both make plenty of mistakes. The teams can't be separated and finish level after 80 minutes. The Refs make mistakes also but they even out and have no effect on the end result. So in the other finals game everything is the same except the Refs mistakes end up favoring one team and they win by 16 points. I am calling you out Toddles, one of these teams is out of the finals series and the reason is clearly because of the refs. Teams have in the past and will in the future miss out on staying in the finals because of refs mistakes favoring the other team more than yours. It is just a fact whether you admit it or not. It is a fact that close games can come down to one mistake by a player , coach or ref. If refs and bunkers have no influence on the result then save money get rid of the bunker and just let one ref make all the decisions and tell the coaches to pull your collective heads in. .

The NRL needs to explain the walker try in my opinion. They clearly got it wrong unless they have evidence we haven't seen. Most seem to think it is OK to make a mistake like this and it doesn't affect the result.

Not again ! I respect the views of Johns and Fittler but have to ask , where is the upside ? If there is no conclusive video evidence ... what then ? A captains coin toss ? I think going back to the ref making an on field call , before referring it , as we have it now , is the only way to go . The referees have been doing it for 100 years ! Let them make their best call at least . Its good for and in the spirit of the game and invariably leads to an overall improvement in the referees performances . The Bunker should be used to overturn a " howler " and thats it . So in my opinion , the overturning of the Walker try was far more controversial than the Peachy decision . I didn't think there was conclusive evidence he was in front of the kicker , so the on field decision of try shouldn't have been overturned . Maybe the bunker had vision we didn't see .

Yep, Gus et al are big obstacles for rugby league. Gus is ALWAYS right and bangs on and on about it.

WE My satire obviously has you confused. Of course no coach will humiliate a player after a game but he is quick to do it to an official. If the same comments were made in a work place they would be considered harassment. It is gutless as the ref can not defend himself while the coach can say what he likes. The point about mistakes whether it is a ref or player is that we are all human beings and as such prone to such things. A loss "inspired" by a ref is suggesting he is cheating which in itself is a pretty low comment if this is what you meant. I am not saying that a coach or player can not have a go at a referee but when they do it needs to be done on a constructive basis. The carry on with some of the points made by them, Flanagan in particular made him look stupid. Barrett needs to grow up as the ref made a call and it was backed by a video review. The fact he does not like is not going to change the result. But let me guess you are a Manly fan right. Finally if you think the ref's genuinely need help why don't you go and sign up next year and show us how easy it is.No doubt you will be a raging success and be celebrated throughout the NRL as our savior. Too hard for you - thought so.

so many close calls , May as well get rid of the bunker and video referee - just use 2 in goal referees .One at each end Speed up the game !

TT, We all know that players mistakes influence the result , I don't see why people keep on stating the obvious as if some of us are dim. Most times a team loses the coach doesn't mention the refs at all. Would you as a coach humiliate your players straight after a loss on TV? When asked I have heard many coaches say that the team as a whole needs to get better. It is obvious why coaches rarely single out players and is just as obvious why they would try to criticise the refs. The denial by Greenburg just makes coaches angrier. Do you not think that the coach highlights the players mistakes during the week? He is on the side of the players not the ref. If you think Barrett is a cheap shot merchant then you have no idea. Clearly he was distraught because he feels he was duded. I agree that James Maloney should be penalised and binned for impeding a chaser. I also could imagine the coach wondering why Darius Boyd and the rest did far worse repeatedly in Origin 2 and not even a penalty. The build up of frustration is very understandable. Forget about linking player mistakes to refs mistakes , they are unrelated. The coach can work on player mistakes but is powerless to do anything about a loss which is inspired by a ref. Admit mistakes and the ramifications and try to fix them. Are you saying a very angry JT had no point when he felt very strongly that he been duded by wrong calls in a couple of finals games? I think he was hard done by and respect his right to say so.

There has been plenty of times the bunker has ruled try when the on field ref says no try. It allevens out. Its like getting caught speeding by a camera and saying my speedo is incorrect.

Captains call is essential in my opinion as is bunker ruling on forward passes.

WE They had that process years ago and then Keiren Foran knocked a ball on (in a semi final) and the bunker made the wrong call even though the refs did not really agree. For me it should the ref should make a decision and if the captain wants to challenge it then take it to the bunker. Too much time wasting on decisions that should be done very quickly.

WE, The ref's get calls wrong as do players make the wrong decision. The issue is whether or not they are the only factor and what weight should be placed on their decisions over how the players performed. When was the last time you saw a coach go into a after game press talk and single out a player who stuffed up? Let me count - NIL. For me the bagging of the refs in most cases is simply a cheap shot to deflect from a poor team and in many cases coaching performance.

A very poor suggestion by Fittler and Johns. I understood that the Bunker is there to correct "howlers" and to help Referees make the best decision. But, as has been mentioned, someone needs to make a decision. The best placed is the Referee. He should make a ruling based on what he sees and check for a potential concerns if he thinks there may be. Often, "Try/No Try" decisions are overturned if there is evidence to do so That is the Bunker used well. But, if the Bunker has no clear evidence, then it should go back to the Referee (as it does now). The same as it was on the Old Days before the Bunker when a Referee was the only party that can make a decision. Commentators, Coaches and Fans who talk down the use of the Bunker do so out of emotion. They would have the same complaints without the Bunker. It is all about blaming someone else. The only thing I am sympathetic about is the use of slo-mo by the Bunker. The pictures are not clear enough for this. The Bunker should be checking for obvious errors only and at real "pace".

I'm with you Dogs ! I really can't see how you can get the adjudication system much better than it is now whilst ever we have humans involved. Fixing one aspect at the detriment of another, seems to be the Fittler / Johns solution ? There will continue to be some controversy from time to time . We just have to accept that some rulings, due to lack of clear evidence ( ie blocked camera angles, blocked refs view, etc) will fall into the 50/50 realm. In this regard you will win some and lose some calls. My only real beef is where the officials ignore the processes that are now in place to avoid making errors. Like not sending that first Storm try against the Eels to the bunker for confirmation of the on-field ref's personal view that a Parra touch had made the ball go two metres forward not the Storm passer. There would not be the controversy if this was looked at more closely by the bunker which is part of the process.

The way I see it, the ref should make a call just like they always have and do at games all across the country every weekend. Then he or she can ask for the video review to be done. If the video can confirm/change the call good. If not, then we go with the refs call just like it would have happened at a game with no video.

They use the big screen in Super Rugby and I recall a try being awarded to Fiji during the World Cup and Nigel Owens overruling himself when he saw the replay on the big screen.

The Barry......... Fittler and Johns were indeed expert payers but not so sure about expert commentators.

If the ref isn't sure, he shouldn't make a decision on field. What he can do is refer it to the bunker and than he can have a chance to see the replays too so if the bunker can't make a decision and decides to give it a refs decision, the ref can now make a decision after looking at the 'evidence' himself. If everybody else can see the video, the ref surely can and from that he can deduce a decision too instead of guessing a decision and than later upon looking at the big screen he has a different opinion but its too late he can't overturn his ruling and the bunker without sufficient evidence follows suit and there is controversy. I mean what's wrong with a ref making a decision from reviewing the video himself?

I followed this game as being honest with highest integrity the bunker is mathematical computable decision process made but human flaws it has made more mistakes that logic allows. stop this madness go back to fair system

We've had that and the same outcome 'benefit of the doubt' was scrapped. Then the rule was changed to have an on-field call because generally the ref/s are standing right there. The video ref is still a ref and he sits 1ft from the screen. So why have the on-field ref try peer into a small NFL-style screen, whilst being hounded from the crowd? If they review after calling it as a try, unless it is dead obvious (like Uate) the decision remains the same.

It doesn't matter what happened in that game now as it is done and dusted, but for the future; If the ref does not know he does not know, simple as that. If the camera angles cannot show conclusive evidence and there is doubt it is not a try, simple as that. Better still let the ref watch the video on the big screen and make a decision. It works for the NFL in the USA, why not in the NRL?