Farcical scenes as refs opt not to check clear non-try with the bunker

W e need a bunker because humans are always going to struggle to get calls right with one view at full speed , one angle and at times blocked by players. The bunker will still make errors but at a much lesser rate than the alternative.

On this incident: 1. What the hell was Jaxon Paulo doing skating that close to the line once he beat the Dog's defender, it appears he took it too "casually" (pretty much how Bennett summed up the the team's attitude after their loss against the Dogs). I know he is a rookie and this probably comes down to lack of experience, very green but he should have at least stepped in a foot (pun intended) once he was clear of that the tackler, there seemed to be no pressure on him. Too sloppy, he's a good, young lad and I'm sure he won't do that again; 2. Don't blame the ref or cry to the bunker for a decision, I ask what was the touch judge doing? He had 1 job, that was not a difficult one to pick! His eyes must have been painted on, no one at fault, no one else except the touch judge; 3. Bunker? For Pete's sake, they would have looked at it for 10 mins and still screw it up. Dont assume that just because we see it one way the bunker will do the same (just look at Lindsay Collins no try from last week); 4. I guess that decision makes up for the sin-bin of SuA (which should not have been).

Actually, the perfect example of how tech reduces human's abilities. Touchies and refs rely on bunker so don't do their job. If their did their job well, you wouldn't need a bunker.

:laughing: I get that, but what you are actually saying here is that we need a bunker because the touchie isn't doing his job or good enough. So get a better touchie, not a 2$mill faulty bunker. Which also isn't good enough.. or doing its job...

FF of course your right but it’s the time it takes to get that illusionary perfection.I heard a Senior Commentator this morning say the games not fast enough - the Bunker is slowing down the game.

Gold Stars -what are they .I only use to get a kick up the Backside

Sorry to say so, but that's not right. It only appears fine in real-time if you're looking away from the sideline, which is a form of not looking. Errors will always happen, a decent camera angle can pick them up 90% of the time - took 15 sec or so for tv commentators to notice and less than 30 total for confirmed decision. That's technology working perfectly, but human error in choosing not to use it.

Your last paragraph sums it up. Annesely fronts up every week and says things will change but they never do. The referee's never change from week to week and I'm sure some of these younger guys should be given a chance in the non critical matches. But while Bernie Sutton is there the refs roster will not change.

I agree it’s essential but no so much on that it only needs tweaking For me the approach I’d fundamentally flawed. They see it as an opportunity to micro analyse the closest of 50/50 calls in the hopes of coming up with a “perfect” decision - which is impossible I think it needs to be limited in either number of replays or time. That will get rid of the howlers. If used correctly, one or two looks was enough to decide the Paulo try / no-try, the Chris Smith try, the Reimis Smith try, the try that Hoppa stopped with his boot and the Knights captain’s challenge. They’re the potential howlers. Looking at something 12 times to determine if it was a strip or loose carry or whether there was a pinky touching the ball aren’t howlers. They’re 50/50s that are all opinion and will never have a “right” answer I think you and I are on the same page, but I don’t think changing the entire approach to how the technology is used is just a ‘tweak’. It takes someone with the brains and gumption to redesign the system, retrain the thinking of the refs and the fortitude to withstand the inevitable knee jerk criticism

It didn't look great live, but I thought the winger surely couldn't have gone into touch in that situation. I was wrong

Next Monday Annesley will do a press conference complete with the replay of this incident telling us it should not have been awarded. Every one who has watched rugby league knows it should have been overturned by using the bunker. But once again he will say it is in the process of being revamped and the people being retrained . It just doesn't cut it anymore . Take some action or get out of the role simple as that.

What would have happened if that was the try to win the GF and the ref didn't go to the bunker (which is what they're told to do if they are sure it's a try ) ? The precedent was set in the GF last year when a wrong call was reversed but I've yet I've never heard the NRL clarify either way if it's now ok to reverse decisions. I suspect it will come back to bite them. You either can or you can't reverse decisions and if you can you have to do it every time. I'd say after a heated debate that they would reverse this decision in a GF. If I'm correct . do something now.

But the technology isn't going away. I also don't think it's created the monster, the NRL did that by not utilising the technology to best effect. If the NRL ditched the bunker, Channel 9 and Fox will still have slo mo replays and bobbleheads second guessing the refs. In effect we'd be back to where we were 5 years ago, only with more ammunition for the games great destroyers ( Gould and co), because the technology quality has improved.

They need to look at the silly old fashioned notion that the ref gets a gold star on his forehead when he doesn't use the bunker. Even if he awards the try and the goal kicker starts his preparation , get the bunker to look anyway.

Paul it’s only an issue BECAUSE of the the Technology- in real time it appeared fine.Now that we have to split hairs on every decision the Technology has created a Monster

— COMMENT DELETED —

TB the Bunker only needs tweaking,its an essential part of NRL,here’s my 20cents worth on the fix.Annersly needs to take all Bunkerees back to School,pick out all the contentious decisions of 2020and everybody agreeing on the interpretations.Next a video review “live” should only be viewed say 4 times - if in doubt then revert to “Benefit of Doubt System” attacking team gets benefit.Not perfect but no hand grenades required

I called it at home on the couch (always easier there :stoked: ) but thought maybe it was wishful thinking but one replay it was pretty close The process should be that anyone crossing the sideline in a try scoring attempt is an automatic review. If it’s not, the people managing the system (Annesley?) should have their performance questioned If it is, the touchie and Klein should have theirs questioned

You're right of course Andrew, but I think the officials thought it was clear cut in favour of Souths. Bear in mind too, the roasting this poor folks have copped from their own boss in recent times over the Bunker. I reckon if Annersley hadn't been such a DH with the media, when he played the blame game earlier in the week, perhaps they might have thought to send it upstairs. On a separate note, I'd love to see a match official come out and publicly say they hate what Annersely is doing to their confidence & morale. They might not ever referee another NRL game, but his short comings would be out in the open.

I've said this many times but a screen on the sidelines for the onfield ref to use is the way to go. He's the decision maker and if he has doubts, he's perfectly capable of watching a screen and deciding whether to uphold or change his original decision. Put a 40 second time limit on it and if the ref still isn't sure, go with his original call. Speeds things up, eliminates the Bunker and keeps control of the game where it belongs - with the onfield official. By the way, great win to your boys last night. I hope my Dragons learn something about attitude from watching your team give it everything, this late in the season.