The argument is pointless because:

The try may still have been awarded had the game been on sky as the decision whether to refer or not lies firmly with the ref! In which case mistakes can still be made If the game is televised by not referring decisions.

Incorrect tries have been awarded in the past as a result of the ref being confident that no infringement of the rules has been committed regardless that the game was televised.

So ultimately what Sandercock and other coaches are wanting is for every try ever scored to be referred to a video referee to analyse whether or not a try is a try and If any wrongdoing leading up the try has occurred.

It cant and wont work, simple as!

The offender on the incident in question would have been Ryan Bailey. I find it hard to believe anyone would wish to penalise anything he did.

Hull KR may have had a claim for obstruction but as you see them given both ways it's far from certain a video referee would have ruled the score out.

Did the new Hull KR coach also query the validity of the Hodgson touchdown while bitching to Cummings?

I agree that the try may have been allowed at a televised game by not being referred, but I think he has a point that the facilities are there all ready to give video replays at non televised games and maybe they should bring it in.

They could even bring in the option for the coaches to contest decisions based on video analysis, similar to what they do in NFL. Maybe limit it to three per game and deduct a replacement for false calls.

They were lucky not to have at least one, if not two men sin binned. They messed about and laid on all night.

Overall the facilities are extremely limited in comparison to what's available at the televised games and it's often the case, even with all the technology Sky can throw at it, that decisions end up in the 50/50 - stick your finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing - category.

Unless there is 'a real investment' I don't see any likelihood of it being introduced at all matches and I don't see any prospect of there being any real investment.

The only way I see it happening is if it's sponsored. Doubt that Sky would be keen but who knows.

If Craig Sandycock wants a video ref at every game has he given thought to who will have to finance the 6 camera people + equipment + qualified ref it would take to do this?

This smacks of a coach that has just eaten a big bowl of sour grapes to me.

"Our discussions will be kept in house, but he did say it was definitely a no try that Leeds scored to take the lead off us through an obstruction."

Good to see that Sandercock can be trusted to keep shtum.

It is limited, and we are lucky to have our screen at Headingley, but every club videos their games and an extra camera behind both sets of sticks, in addition to the cameras in the stands, should give an idea of what happened to a video ref.

It won't give the same quality replays as the sky tv cams, but it could work.

This would be the Watkins try which all he had to do was catch the ball and put it down. He did not have to beat 3 kr players and run 30m he did that just to show off. Defo sour grapes and we scored 3 more try's after that.
Plus even if there was a video ref they still get fissions wrong.

They should have them at all games or non at all.

I this case though if there was a video ref at this game I reckon Hodgson's try would've been chalked off as he dropped the ball while trying to ground the ball. Swings and roundabouts n'all that.

This.

Seems like they've sat down, gone through the match and Sandercock has breached their confidentiality to whinge about one specific, marginal incident trying to infer they were badly done to. Paints him in a poor light, IMO.

Hull KR ran well overall over the 80 minutes.

Their stupid ill-discipline caused their blow-out in the final quarter.

I hope Super-cock realises this.

Well done to Tvoc for noticing TMFMISL's superb 'dummy run' which drew in a host of red and white shirts in this incident.

tbf like tvoc says if video replays were in use hodgsons try would have been dissallowed, I hope sandercock's not gonna be a moaner, we've already got enough of them in super league.

One of the Cas trys v Salford was just as questionable and they had a VR but still given and St's and Wire score plenty more blatant than the Watkins one it's strange none of the highlight shows called it as such and mentioned the bad read by Dobson.

Contradicts himself anyway by saying the discussion between the two parties will be kept in house but then goes on to tell the tale of one of their "talking" points. A fitting coach for a club with a fitting reputation....

Giving an idea is no different to what we have already at the non televised games, where we additionally have in-goal judges whose sole responsibility appears to be to assess the validity of tries. The on-field officials (four pairs of eyes for each score) are actually reasonably capable of making these calls if you're prepared to trust them to do so.



Precisely on the first part so what's the point in wasting money, time and effort to introduce a system the game can't afford and likely as not will not be any more reliable than trusting the on field officials.

I thought tonight's game was a reasonably apt demonstration of how useful a non broadcast quality system would be. When it takes a camera situated appox 90 metres away to clearly see a 'no try' after cameras at the scoring end appeared to show a possible score it's highly likely that 'try' would have been awarded when perhaps the referee's instinct had correctly told him the ball was bounced.

Don't get me wrong I'd like to have the full video referee available at every game but I just don't see it happening on financial grounds.

Back in Ashley Klein's SL days they had a trial at Hull KR but (despite it being relatively successful) the clubs baulked at the annual price tag for introducing it. Someone may remember the actual figure but I recall it being at least £250K.

__________



Yeah .... minus two dodged a potential bullet there. McGuire might have had to take a share of it or perhaps all of it as I don't think Opta do half penalties.

You were lucky Blake Green wasnt playing or Rovers would of kicked your a-se !

My thoughts exactly mate. Welcome to the little league! A 14-5 pen count should be his concern. I would think that might be more to do with his teams loss, or maybe all that spoiling stopped it been a cricket score?

Sorry mate but have to massively disagree.

If you take last nights game at the new (and quite impressive) Langtree Park for instance - when Dixon (??) was through for a touchdown. From 3 camera angles it looked like a nailed on try then from the final 4th camera it was clearly a knock on.

If you're going to have a video ref then it needs to have an entire professional infrastructure to support him and just not a couple of groundsmen with Handycams.

I love australians, they never accept responsibility for anything

Is he moaning? Or is he making a valid point?

I think he is making a very valid point - everyone should be playing under the same rules and conditions.

It's like saying - we haven't got enough touch judges, so we'll only have 2 touch judges at 3 games this weekend - people wouldn't stand for it.

Whilst I think the video ref can assist in the decision, I have also seen many a strange one and don't always see "Slow mo" as effective.

However, Season 17 - we should have the technology at all games or not at all.

Everyone IS playing under the the same rules and conditions - every team 'should' get the same number of televised games over the season hence getting the same number of games in which the video ref is involved.

I am not sure of the figures......but is it an equal amount of sky games for all teams?

Even if that is the case - the arguemement is still flawed......

It wouldn't bother me if you got rid of the refs cheerleaders!