VR for matters of Fact, Ref for everything else.

...like the Withers knock on.

kind of.

We used to have a wonderful system. There was a bloke, invariably in black, who right or wrong, came up with a decision about all aspects of the game which required one. Players, whether in agreement or not, accepted his decision and got on with the game. Fans, naturally, tended to disagree with all his decisions which went against their favourites and argued, in the pubs and clubs until long into the night, but this mattered not a jot.

We now have the VR. Players, whether in agreement or not, accept this decision and get on with the game. Fans, naturally, tend to disagree with all his decisions which go against their favourites and argue, in the pubs and clubs until long into the night, but this matters not a jot.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose..

In the NRL the video ref chips in for foul play too. For example if a bloke is the victim of a high shot that is missed the video ref gets in the ear of the on field refs.

I don’t have too much problem with this.

However when it comes to tries the on field refs seem to send more decisions upstairs than ever, even when the decision is clear. Is it down to a fear of responsibility? Are modern refs not getting into position to make decisions well enough as they know they can just send it upstairs?

Once it’s up there the video ref often wants a million looks at it too which causes further delay and often proves contentious in the end anyway.

I do wonder if it’s worth all the hassle. It’s not foolproof, refs can’t win either way. If they got rid of it I’d not be bothered.

one thing i would like to see is that 'the grounding' (i.e whether the player had control or not, not whether it was in out of play or whether it was held up) should be decided at normal speed, slowing it down and down and down only seems to create more doubt rather than help anyone. The saints one a couple of weeks back was an absolutely appalling decision that was 100% a try in full speed, and 99.9% in super slow-mo.

The HKR man was in front of the man when he passed the ball and the ball was passed forward from one player to the other.
If he had been level with the passer and caught the ball it would not have been judged as forward although as we all know very well the ball would have travelled forward. We all know about the physics of the debate it's been going on for decades.
What is indisputable is that if a ball is passed in a forward direction it will be judged as that. The HKR/Wigan incident was one such case. The line markings just emphasised it.
There is a very good case for having a VR at each SL game from 2016 or before, the clubs cannot now claim they haven't the money as they did in the past!

Unlike the one given last night which was never a try in a month of Sundays.

Well, you [and I might think so, but as they used to say in days gone by," take a look in the morning paper"..