Mateo try?

[innsaneink]

Never said it was the blunder of the century….still a pretty big blunder, couldve changed the game.
Im not talking reasons...talking facts about the game
Why so defensive....and Ive no idea why you think its personal...Ive only just noticed you in the wests/balmain thread
Thats quite a defeatist attitude to suggest because weve copped wrong calls before its OK now....you seem happy as long as it goes your way?
I then take it you'd be screeaming blue murder if the shoe was on the other foot.
As I thought.

 

[redemption]

well we have 3 mistakes in 2 rounds so far lets see how many they would get wrong if we get rid of video refs altogether as you said . Mike if we get rid of video refs can we still use video evidence to incriminate players for illegal things ie spear tackles high tackles gouging biting etc What is so wrong about trying to get the decision right 99.5 out of 100 when it is so easy to do so If there are mistakes it is usually from bad camera angles

I never said get rid of the video refs, I said I like the current 2011 practice. That is only going up to the video ref when the ref on the field is not 100% sure of the call. In previous years the refs on the field have been using the video ref as a crutch, too afraid to make a decision. I like the spontaneity so far of 2011 season. We are not going endlessly up to the video ref and having to watch 8 replays just to make a call and even then not always getting it right.

I repeat I like the current 2011 practice and if there is an occasional error from the ref on the field making a decision then I can live with that.

Harrigan was always 100% confident - even when he was 100% WRONG!!!

If technology works they should use it!!!

But the technology doesn't work 100% of the time. In the end the decision is still made by a human and even with the help of all the technology they can still get it wrong.

Of course human error will occur - but the fact remains that **technology has the potential to significantly reduce the margin of error!!!!!!**

Harrigan (in the video box) still states he was right about Hayne touching the line in THAT Origin game!! So it will never help an egotistic moron like him!

But this technology does have the capacity to bring other arrogant pig-headed refs into line & build better performances!!!

 

[innsaneink]

The Hayne Origin incident comes down to opinion, there was no clear conclusive video evidence supporting either argument, the ground level and camera angle combined with how close it really mustve been all create questions still to this day

 

[redemption]

The Hayne Origin incident comes down to opinion, **there was no clear conclusive video evidence supporting either argument**, the ground level and camera angle combined with how close it really mustve been all create questions still to this day

And the rules state if inconclusive then "benefit of the doubt" should apply!!! Correct????

But Harrigan still says he was 100% certain - because he is a self-righteous tosser!!!

 

[innsaneink]

Dont think that applies to the touchline, tho happy to be corrected…thought it was only grounding.

 

[redemption]

Dont think that applies to the touchline, tho happy to be corrected…thought it was only grounding.

It applies to everything but forward passes when they are the matter which is referred!

You surely have seen possible knock-ons - off-sides etc referred - & the same rule applies!

If inconclusive it is either benefit of doubt - or refs call - & "Hollywood" was never going to give it back to the man in the middle (note no touchie put up his flag)!!!

So I am glad you are happy to be corrected - because you just have been!!

 

[innsaneink]

Thanks red…happy to be corrected by an expert.
Clear Harrigan thought otherwise....just like the ref in our game the other night.
Doesnt make them tossers, just human.

 

[tiger4ever]

Never said it was the blunder of the century….still a pretty big blunder, couldve changed the game.
Im not talking reasons...talking facts about the game
Why so defensive....and Ive no idea why you think its personal...Ive only just noticed you in the wests/balmain thread
Thats quite a defeatist attitude to suggest because weve copped wrong calls before its OK now....you seem happy as long as it goes your way?
I then take it you'd be screeaming blue murder if the shoe was on the other foot.
As I thought.

\
\
Yes i do get upset if a obvious call goes against us dont we all..

Unlike you im saying the refs will make mistakes and we got 1 going our way but it wont happen all the time i realise that.

so tell my why out of all the post you singled out mine for your attention.

It was just a comment i made not directed at anyone in particular.

Anyway i said it was a try i voted yes.

 

[redemption]

Thanks red…happy to be corrected by an expert.
Clear Harrigan thought otherwise....just like the ref in our game the other night.
Doesnt make them tossers, just human.

Harrigan thinks he is super-human mate!!!

I don't rate him as a ref or a human being!!

Bug calls Sheens the Fonz for never admitting mistakes - but Harrigan makes the combined/collective egos of Sheens, Russell Crowe, Alan Jones, Ray Hadley & Gus Gould appear humble in comparison!!

 

[mike]

Of course human error will occur - but the fact remains that **technology has the potential to significantly reduce the margin of error!!!!!!**

Harrigan (in the video box) still states he was right about Hayne touching the line in THAT Origin game!! So it will never help an egotistic moron like him!

But this technology does have the capacity to bring other arrogant pig-headed refs into line & build better performances!!!

Of course "**technology has the potential to significantly reduce the margin of error**" unfortunately it is often un-realised potential because there is still a human involved. I just like the current interpretation of not sending everything up to the video ref and waiting for endless number of replays to make a call.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

It was a try any day of the week.

If I was a Warriors supporter I'd be pretty unhappy. Every bad decision needs to be judged on it's merit, it's not as simple as saying "well, we were penalised for this and that so it evened out in the end," because that isn't acceptable.

 

[happy_tiger]

Thanks red…happy to be corrected by an expert.
Clear Harrigan thought otherwise....just like the ref in our game the other night.
Doesnt make them tossers, just human.

Harrigan thinks he is super-human mate!!!

I don't rate him as a ref or a human being!!

Bug calls Sheens the Fonz for never admitting mistakes - but Harrigan makes the combined/collective egos of Sheens, Russell Crowe, Alan Jones, Ray Hadley & Gus Gould appear humble in comparison!!

Yes as a Qlder worse one of all of Harrigans mistakes was sending Tallis off for calling him a cheat. Didn't see anyone send Scott Prince off when he said and was picked up on TV mike about ref having "black and gold jocks on "

 

[Yossarian]

Thanks red…happy to be corrected by an expert.
Clear Harrigan thought otherwise....just like the ref in our game the other night.
Doesnt make them tossers, just human.

Harrigan thinks he is super-human mate!!!

I don't rate him as a ref or a human being!!

Bug calls Sheens the Fonz for never admitting mistakes - but Harrigan makes the combined/collective egos of Sheens, Russell Crowe, Alan Jones, Ray Hadley & Gus Gould appear humble in comparison!!

I'm pretty much on record as hating Harrigan. I think he is a goose, a clown, and a few other words not suitable for a family forum…

However... I do think he's done a pretty good job so far. I'm certainly all for some of his rule enforcements, particularly guys moving off the mark or playing the ball incorrectly (although they missed a corker from Manly). Also making players take drop outs behind the line - I don't want to see penalties for kicks a couple of cm over the chalk but some players were taking drop outs a metre into the field of play!

Oh and for my 2c worth I thought it was a try. Seemed that he grounded it too but the shots they showed of that weren't conclusive. I understand Shortall made a call at the time and Harrigan encourages that, but he was standing over him. I didn't think he grounded it when I first saw it - I just don't understand how he thought he did...