Are there too many video reviews in sport?
It's the hottest topic in both rugby union and rugby league at the moment — the use, or misuse, of technology.
The NRL is currently embroiled in an officiating crisis, after a series of high-profile incidents cast the spotlight on what constitutes an effective use of the video review bunker system.
NRL chief executive Todd Greenberg and referees boss Bernard Sutton were forced into a defence of the multi-million-dollar Bunker, that was introduced in 2017 with the express purpose of improving the "accuracy, consistency, efficiency and transparency of the decision review process", according to the NRL website.
Meanwhile in union, World Rugby is set to examine the excessive use of the Television Match Official (TMO) that has severely affected recent internationals and the last few rounds of the Super Rugby calendar.
Technology has been a part of both codes for a number of years, and while initially technology was seen as a panacea with which to cure all ills in the sport, the recent reality has served to create a whole new list of issues.
Critics of video reviews have long argued that adding technology for anything other than definitive, yes or no decisions is pointless, time-consuming and simply creates more confusion.
Needless to say those critics have been having a field day over the past month.
Inconsistency in rugby
Rugby supporters have suffered from the overuse of technology more than most in recent weeks.
It is increasingly frequent to have play stopped for seemingly indeterminable periods during rugby matches whilst the TMO checks for one of many potential infringements.
These interruptions have had major impacts in recent weeks.
In a recent Test match against New Zealand, France full-back Benjamin Fall was sent off in the 11th minute by Australian referee Angus Gardner, who received assistance and advice from his TMO in making the decision.
France went on to lose that game 26-13 — and to add insult to injury, Fall was later cleared of any wrongdoing.
Wallabies star Israel Folau was banned for one week in a similar incident that occurred in the third Test against Ireland — one of a series of decisions that had coaches and commentators shaking their heads and threatened to overshadow the series.
Away from the international scene in Super Rugby, Sunwolves flanker Ed Quirk was sent off against the Queensland Reds for what appeared to be a trivial offence, one labelled "a love tap" by Reds coach Brad Thorn.
Officials are right to come down hard on dangerous or foul play, but at what price do we pursue perfection?
Decisions such as these, along with the increasingly frequent stoppages for video referees to scrutinise every breakdown with forensic intensity, are potentially damaging the spectacle.
Speaking in San Francisco at the Sevens World Cup, World Rugby chief executive Brett Gosper suggested that changes were afoot — possibly in time for November's spring tours of the Northern Hemisphere.
"There is probably too much reliance at the moment on the TMO." Gosper said
Those were the fears voiced just last week in a statement by SANZAAR chief executive Andy Marinos.
"A major concern for us at present is the practical implementation of the Television Match Official protocols," SANZAAR chief executive Andy Marinos said in a statement.
"The protocols are clearly not working and a specific review is required in this area."
It is expected that any changes will see the decision to call for TMO intervention will rest solely with the referee, with less emphasis placed on picking up minor incidents not directly related to the current passage of play that will be dealt with later by a citing officer.
Challenge accepted?
One option that has been mooted is the introduction of a coach or captain's challenge.
This would echo the system that exists in the NFL, where video reviews have undergone a significant evolution since being first introduced in 1985.
A key feature of the current NFL review system is that coaches are allowed to challenge calls that are then reviewed by the on-field official.
This challenge system has now been in use for 19 seasons, with around 37 per cent of the nearly 6,000 reviewed plays being overturned, each review taking on average two minutes and 45 seconds.
The inclusion of a coach's challenge could add a sense of theatre to the use of technology.
It is something All Blacks coach Steve Hansen has long been an advocate for in rugby union and one that plenty of coaches in the NRL would relish — not least Ricky Stuart.
Although in the case of the Raiders-Bulldogs game last Friday night, would a challenge have done any good?
After all, it was the Bunker that allowed the try despite all the available evidence suggesting it shouldn't.
External Link: The incident sparking so much controversy
Herein lies the biggest current problem with the available technology — its incorrect application.
Referees are not omnipotent. They neither see nor hear everything that goes on in a game, and to expect them to is unrealistic.
To that end the bunker, or any other video review system is only as effective as those running it.
An expectation from supporters that video review technology guarantees perfection is as unrealistic as expecting each and every player to be relentlessly flawless throughout the game.
An expectation of general improvement however is not unreasonable.
As the use of VAR in the recent football World Cup showed, even the more technologically inhibited sports have begun to embrace change — change that was heralded a success by FIFA, with some clear and obvious errors being noted and corrected — although the Socceroos may disagree.
Even the AFL is on-board, although despite looking to change plenty of other rules, it has not yet moved beyond the relatively limited jurisdiction of simply reviewing goals.
Needless to say, technology is not going anywhere in top level sport.
The challenge is to make the best use of it.
[contf]
[contfnew]
ABC .net
[contfnewc]
[contfnewc]
