The captain’s challenge is in the spotlight at the moment with claims and counter claims about how it’s being used.
Is it a worthwhile addition to the game among the many rule changes that have flooded into the NRL in recent years?
Teams have been exploiting the rule by deliberately conceding a penalty to stop play because the referee had missed an incident in the lead-up.
Should the NRL get rid of the captain’s challenge, keep it at one per game or increase the chances a team gets to question a refereeing decisions?
Keep as is. I like the concept for which it was originally intended. But just like the Taxation department, coaches and players are trying to take advantage of the loopholes that have been created.
Refs have to take a strong stance and not be intimidated by captains on the field.
Keep as is. But if a team gives away a penalty to force a captain’s challenge make it mandatory that a player gets 10 in the bin if they’re wrong. That’ll stop 50-50 calls being questioned and players will know that if they get it wrong, it’ll be very costly.
Increase it. I can clearly see the downside of having too many stoppages. Expanding the number of captain’s challenges will absolutely see more stoppages, with sides almost certain to more freely use one at the start of the game to win the initial arm wrestle, and even as a tool to stop momentum.
However, in spite of those concerns, I’m in favour of one per half. Accompanying this expansion must be very clear guidance in regard to sides who engineer stoppages in play in order to challenge decisions – or non-decisions – as that is one very big Pandora’s box right there. While I can certainly see why a side would do it if something has been missed, if they are wrong then they’ve performed a professional foul. That should always be a sin-binning.
Increase it. Give each team 2 and be 100% clear with EVERYONE about when they can be used. I’d also suggest 14 of the 16 teams review their own use of the challenge because there are just some diabolical wastes happening that impact a team later in a game.
I reckon it’s also worth looking into making them a ‘coach’s challenge’ because they’ve got video replays in the box (it won’t happen, I just think it should).
Keep as is. I enjoy the ‘Captain’s Challenge’ and in my view it should absolutely stay as is. But like most things in rugby league, it’s about consistency. Whether you think what the Titans did on Saturday is within the spirit or the game or not, we need clear messaging on whether that type of challenge is allowed or not. I can understand player and fan frustration when rule interpretations seem to change each week.
Keep or increase. The more captain’s challenges provided, the more frivolous they will become – 1 or 2 per game appears to be a fair number and I’d be happy either way. However, I would like to see the Commission think more of entertainment and take the bold step of perhaps setting a yearly total number of challenges available to each team, perhaps 30, with their use at the digression of the captain and how aggressive he chooses to be with them.
Team A might use eight in the first round whereas team B refuses to use any and saves them up for the final half of the season when the stakes are raised somewhat. I’d also like to see any left-over challenges roll-over into the semi-finals, where two teams could meet with 10+ challenges up their sleeve and we can subsequently watch a game of rugby league that lasts for three and a half hours!
Keep as is. Keep it the same.
I absolutely love the Captain’s Challenge, and as we saw on Saturday night – even though the tactics weren’t Kosher – the challenges were necessary as the referee had missed what the Titans were questioning.
It’s a shame that with a referee, two touch judges and a bunker that things still get missed, but human error is unfortunately inevitable, and if a team feels there has been an incorrect call I like that they have the chance to question it. And I also love when the challenge is unsuccessful and the ref looks back at the player with a bit of a smug look like “should have listened to me in the first place!”
Keep as is. Captain’s Challenge is a decent idea and I like it as it is. If they did more, we’d see even more of the timewasting aspect of it, but I’d not get rid of it completely. That said, I watch plenty of Super League without it and don’t miss it at all, but then I also watch NSW Cup without any bunker and don’t really miss it either. Guess you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube…
Keep as is. One is probably the right amount to have. A ref getting it wrong is frustrating but the fact we see so many challenges end up unsuccessful should remind us that we’re dealing with people, people make mistakes, and sometimes you’ve just got to cop it on the chin and get on with the game. So yeah, you get to question the ref, but if you’re wrong even once, then you’re done for the day.
Maxtruck
Roar Rookie
The Captain, and I mean the Captain , not anyone of 17 players, needs to call for the challenge PRIOR to viewing the replay on the ground big screen. The current scenario where players watch the replays and wait for a signal from the runner needs to stop.
Pickett
Roar Rookie
Yeah..naahh.
The Barry
Roar Guru
I’d happily see it go, I think stopping multiple times to look at multiple replays has more of a detrimental impact on the game than having to cop the odd wrong decision and get on with it. But also pragmatic enough to realise you can never wind this stuff back I think the game needs to really think hard about how it’s used because it’s a bit of a mess There’s a lot of commentary about fixing the “howler” or the momentum changer - and of course that’s a good thing. But I reckon they account for less than 10% of captain’s challenges I’d really think long and hard about not allowing it for strip / loose carry calls. These are the calls in games that are usually 50/50 and the ones that suck up most of the time looking at replays for decisions that rarely have definitive answers. The irony is that the closer to 50/50 they are, the more time they waste… The NRL should stomp all over players giving deliberate penalties to have something looked at. You can’t do that as the rules stand and giving away a deliberate penalty is a professional foul The time limit needs to be strictly enforced. You call it immediately or it’s gone. There was one earlier in the year (can’t remember who), where about 25 seconds went by and the skipper had a chance to look at the replay before making the challenge I’d also consider taking challenges away for challenges deemed frivolous. The Dogs did one last week towards the end of the game. It was zero chance of being successful. If the impact of making that challenge was that they wouldn’t have a challenge this week, would Jacko have made the call…? That would take care of a lot of the time wasters, clock stoppers and hail Mary’s. I recognise there’s heaps of flaws to that idea. On the plus side it’s a great example of the NRL doing what it does best… adding another layer of rules to manage a rule added on the run…
Nat
Roar Guru
No no, I’m saying doing like they are now by lying on the ruck to create a stoppage on that play. Case in point Herbert, who was held out so he dived on the ruck until the penalty was blown. I’m not advocating for just stopping in the middle of a play.
Pomoz
Roar Rookie
Nat, you are asking for players to challenge when a ref doesn't make a decision. In other words they miss a knock on or head high tackle. The Bunker is there to pick up errors like that. Th game would descend into farce if a player can just stop the game and challenge something a ref missed but didn't call. Imagine a player taking a hit up in their own 20m zone and he notices the outside defending backs are offside. Can he stop dead, raise his hand and challenge the lack of offside call? The flow of the game relies on a ref's judgement to make it watchable and not descend into a stream of penalties for minor indiscretions. The idea is good as long as it is limited to the decisions that are made. Once you widen its application to non-decisions, the game will have so many penalties it will need to be renamed to Rugby Union.
Forty Twenty
Roar Rookie
Lucky it wasn't the dodgy ref making the penalty try call, it was the bunker. The ref should have been hooked in the 1st half.
Tom G
Roar Rookie
It was the only one they got right!!!
Pete
Guest
Keep it. Yeah the bunker gets it wrong at times but they get a lot more right than they do wrong. I'd much rather the game stop for a minute or two and we get the right decision than watch a side potentially get dudded due to a mistake from the ref.
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
Spoken like headless chhok, JA. At least Souths have won one legitimate premiership since then and fell 2 points short of their 22nd premiership last year and they didn't need two set of salary cap books and a former NRL salary cap auditor general playing shell and pea games with the books.
Forty Twenty
Roar Rookie
I won't bore you with all the calls they got wrong but this isn't one of them.
Cam
Roar Rookie
If the refs did their job correctly, you wouldn't need the captains challenge. Some matches this year, I have seen half a dozen successful challenges. Be better with the whistle.
Pickett
Roar Rookie
Fair go..what about that ridiculous penalty try awarded to lyin Lyon? Manly fans never seem to bring this up.
JOHN ALLAN
Guest
Shame “fans challenge” wasn’t in place when “The Pride of the League” was rightly kicked out of the competition. It would have saved them the trouble of crawling their way back.
Nick
Roar Guru
I reckon you should definitely be allowed to stop the game mid play if you want to challenge. But in order to protect the primacy of the referee, if you stop mid play to challenge, and you're wrong, then the other team gets a penalty goal attempt 10m out in front of the sticks. It will stop anyone who wants to tactically use it for a breather, or to disrupt momentum etc. Will also make the captain think long and hard about the merits of a challenge in general.
TragicallySupportive
Roar Rookie
I would have thought deliberately conceding a penalty to stop the game is a professional foul irrespective of the outcome of the challenge.
Pickett
Roar Rookie
We're gonna have to agree to disagree. What are the touchies doing anyway these days???
Nathan Absalom
Roar Guru
Yeah, but cricket umpires changed with the DRS. When they first had run outs, it led to umpires giving way more run outs as they realized that the benefit of the doubt was massively in favour of the batsmen. When it came in for lbw's, we realized that balls pitching in line and straightening were far more likely to be out than before, and so umps started giving more lbw's to, for instance, offies coming around the wicket to the right hander. In league, we see how often the ref calls a knock back a knock on. But we all know that and the refs have been told to call 'em all forward, so it's a weird system where it's one rule on the ground and one rule upstairs. It hasn't worked for mine.
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
If there are howler mistakes Pickett I'm all for the bunker giving the referee the heads up and calling back play. Like when Albert Kelly didn't retreat to the Broncos defensive line before scoring a Try off an illegal interception. Similarly, although it happened years ago in a Manly vs Raiders game, when Brett Stewart was not back onside before the play the ball and therefore out of play and not able to involve himself before the next tackle and yet backed up to score a Try. The bunker should be able to rule on things like that. Likewise, with the new forward pass technology being brought into the game the bunker can finally rule on forward passes and remove that blight from our game. Currently, the bunker isn't worth the money invested in it. Not until it can be more consistent with it's rulings, apply commonsense, stop seeing everything in black and white and make quicker decisions! Currently they have someone's grandfather working a video remote control to control the video replays. We are in the digital age. We shouldn't even be using videos! :silly:
Nat
Roar Guru
A) You obviously don't know what strawman means. B) You bleat out over 800 comments a month. You challenge me to go fine one comment from one specific game 6 months ago? You couldn't remember #refsfault from the Broncos game so your assumption that you didn't is very likely wrong. C) I said next.
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
I'm am angry old man EJ. Make me omnipotent for a day and I'll fix it all up. Just watch me.