There were no In -goal judges at the Saints game on Sunday - presumably because it was a Sky game, so the ref could always go to the video ref if there was any doubt about a decision.

There were, however 2 crucial decisions (100% black and white) which were not spotted by the ref or touch judges. Neither a try scoring opportunity and thus neither referred "upstairs" to the video ref: Foster slipping and his foot going over the dead ball line and Pat having the ball reefed by Wellens 2 minutes from the end which led to a drop out - rather than a penalty. Both decisions almost excusable as they were 40 -50 yards away for the foot over the line and the reefing was on Bentham's "blindside" - Pat's body obscured Wellens's hand.

Both would have been very clear to an in-goal judge - but there was none there!

Should we have in-goal judges at all games - or should we allow the video ref more opportunity to convey totally unambiguous information to the ref? There was a stop in play following the reefing before the dropout - could Thaler not have instructed Bentham about the "mistake"?

Until we get the benefit of an official in the stands at every game we must have an in goal judge at ever game.

I think this boils down to a basic lack of funding. We don't have enough officials to send 6 to cover every game and we certainly don't have enough money to have multiple cameras at every ground to have a video ref present at every game

I said the same to some mates after the game on Sunday. In goal judges should be at TV games too.

it was different when the ref was on your side when you beat us at knowsley road
though wernt it he, you was holding down and gettin away with it and if we even
lifted a leg it was a penalty, carnt win can ya

do in goal judges rule on those decisions?

Do you or do you not agree with the posters question?

know u carnt

Whenever somebody accuses us of holding down you can tell they are stupid straight away cant you?



Wrestling before tackle is completed (legal) which is what we do but holding down we dont do. HTH

I asked about this a few years back, and I believe that the reason is actually more practical.

If you have an in-goal judge at a televised match, his job is to stand as close to the grounding as he can.

This has the unfortunate side-effect of making the video ref's job anything from more difficult to impossible, as the in-goal judge is guaranteed to block AT LEAST one, if not more of the possible camera angles.

What do people think about scrapping video refs? I know Tony Smith has been saying he thinks they should go.

Would people rather have video refs making decisions or in goal judges along with the ref on the field deciding?

At any game there is a video ref there are no in goal judges the reason is they are not needed as there is a video ref that was the explanation i was given by Stuart Cummings when i asked him a couple of years ago.
Personally i think we should have the same rules at every game its not easy for officials anyway but having a video ref one week then just in goal judge the week after does not help constancy. It should be a video ref at all games or at none then at least a ref has the same options at every game.