State of Origin
- Thread starter LynnH
- Start date
Agree, they were better, but if we can use what if's like the video ref..... then what if NSW didn't drop the ball cold on numerous occasions....
Bills boo boo only meant another try...not 5 or 6 tries that QLD "should" have scored.....they dropped the ball alot too....
I think the teams were closer than the results showed.....both games....
Bills boo boo only meant another try...not 5 or 6 tries that QLD "should" have scored.....they dropped the ball alot too....
I think the teams were closer than the results showed.....both games....
Thorpey there's a difference. The video ref is supposed to be impartial and shouldn't make any mistakes considering he sees the exact same footage we do. When he stuffs up it can be a huge advantage to one side and the opposite to the other. This simply isn't fair. Whereas players simply dropping balls is just the game. So not really a what if, more of a 'should of been.' And yes both teams dropped the ball a lot. Crocker knocked on about 4 times in 15 or so minutes.
When I played Moses was our full back [crappy footballer, that's why he played reserves] but there was no second guessing the ref. The fans of the losing side went home grumbling and the winners were grinners.
Two refs on the field and Harrigan up top and I doubt the percentages of right/wrong decisions has improved. Obviously the number of blatently bad decisions has been reduced to near zero but we now argue about whether a single blade of grass was painted white or not. I seriously doubt there is any more satisfaction.
I'd prefer that if "it looked good" it was given, if "it looked out" it wasn't. Carry on with the game......
Two refs on the field and Harrigan up top and I doubt the percentages of right/wrong decisions has improved. Obviously the number of blatently bad decisions has been reduced to near zero but we now argue about whether a single blade of grass was painted white or not. I seriously doubt there is any more satisfaction.
I'd prefer that if "it looked good" it was given, if "it looked out" it wasn't. Carry on with the game......
Sunfish I have no qualms with a ref on the field making a wrong call when he's put on the spot. It happens, we all make mistake, and it often makes the game more exciting. The problem I have is with video refs getting calls wrong when they've got all the evidence in front of them, and time to make the right call. It seems like the easiest, cushiest and well paid job I can think of, can't be too hard to find someone with some common sense who is willing to do it.
Mate, I abhor forward passes. They give a massive advantage to the attacking team if they aren't called. That's why I cheered the two ref idea: One keeping the attacking team honest and the other watching the defenders. Sadly they have become pedantic as in union without doing much better re forward passes.
But it's still the best football code.
But it's still the best football code.
