I realise this is going to be unpopular, because pretty much everybody I speak to seems to want it stopped, but personally it's something I've been in favour of since it was introduced, and I still am.

I remember before we had it, if there was no absolutely conclusive evidence either way that a try had been scored, then it was expected to be awarded as benefit of the doubt to the attacking team.

If that was the case now, then presumably the two tries that have gone against us in the last two weeks because the video referee couldn't find sufficient evidence to overturn the live call would still have been awarded?

If the video ref is 100% certain either way then they can overturn the call. If they're not, then before there was any call to overturn, then they were always supposed to award the try weren't they? At least this way there is still some onus on the on field referee to get it right in the first place.

If that try last night was sent to the video ref without the on field ref saying what he thought, and was then awarded by benefit of the doubt, we would simply be angry with the video ref instead of the on field ref wouldn't we? What would be the benefit to getting rid of the current system?

Probably, I mean Leeds were doing it for a short time till they saw it was not working for them and the ironic cheer from their fans when they went long for first time. But like Uncle Rico said there is a time and place for it.

Yes I remember Leeds getting into it. It didn't really work for them. New laws though will change it.

Why will the new laws change it, it used to be a penalty and kick to touch or tap on the 10m and now it's just a PTB on the 10m line, what has changed to make teams suddenly think they should now go for short drop out's or am I missing something so obvious that I can't see for looking?

Quote ="Warrior Winger"Why will the new laws change it, it used to be a penalty and kick to touch or tap on the 10m and now it's just a PTB on the 10m line, what has changed to make teams suddenly think they should now go for short drop out's or am I missing something so obvious that I can't see for looking?'" If you kicked it out on the full or didn't kick it 10m you gave away 2pts from a kick under the posts. With the new laws the opposition just get possession. It isn't a Penalty offence anymore. FROM NRL "Traditionally, teams have attempted to kick the ball as far as possible off a set restart, but a new ruled in introduced in 2024 — meaning short drop-outs and kick-offs are no longer penalised if they don't go the required 10-metre distance or go out on the full — has taken the tactic to a new level https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pr ... 117631de98

Quote ="Warrior Winger"Why will the new laws change it, it used to be a penalty and kick to touch or tap on the 10m and now it's just a PTB on the 10m line, what has changed to make teams suddenly think they should now go for short drop out's or am I missing something so obvious that I can't see for looking?'" If you kicked it out on the full or didn't kick it 10m you gave away 2pts from a kick under the posts. With the new laws the opposition just get possession. It isn't a Penalty offence anymore. FROM NRL "Traditionally, teams have attempted to kick the ball as far as possible off a set restart, but a new ruled in introduced in 2024 — meaning short drop-outs and kick-offs are no longer penalised if they don't go the required 10-metre distance or go out on the full — has taken the tactic to a new level https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pr ... 117631de98

Quote ="Smiffy27"If you kicked it out on the full or didn't kick it 10m you gave away 2pts from a kick under the posts. With the new laws the opposition just get possession. It isn't a Penalty offence anymore. FROM NRL "Traditionally, teams have attempted to kick the ball as far as possible off a set restart, but a new ruled in introduced in 2024 — meaning short drop-outs and kick-offs are no longer penalised if they don't go the required 10-metre distance or go out on the full — has taken the tactic to a new level https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pr ... 117631de98'" Thanks Smiffy, I thought it was classed as a 'differential' penalty or whatever it was called i.e. a kick for touch or tap restart and not a opportunity to kick for goal, my mistake as I really can't remember the last time I saw a short drop out get penalised or anyone kick for goal from it, thanks.

Quote ="Smiffy27"If you kicked it out on the full or didn't kick it 10m you gave away 2pts from a kick under the posts. With the new laws the opposition just get possession. It isn't a Penalty offence anymore. FROM NRL "Traditionally, teams have attempted to kick the ball as far as possible off a set restart, but a new ruled in introduced in 2024 — meaning short drop-outs and kick-offs are no longer penalised if they don't go the required 10-metre distance or go out on the full — has taken the tactic to a new level https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pr ... 117631de98'" Thanks Smiffy, I thought it was classed as a 'differential' penalty or whatever it was called i.e. a kick for touch or tap restart and not a opportunity to kick for goal, my mistake as I really can't remember the last time I saw a short drop out get penalised or anyone kick for goal from it, thanks.