The captain's challenge has been given the green light by the ARL Commission for round one of the season after trial runs in the All Stars and Charity Shield.
NRL CEO Todd Greenberg has announced the new rule will be brought in after the Commission and the NRL football department had been pleased with how the system operated during the trials.
"This is an exciting innovation for our game," he said.
"It will add an additional layer of excitement, unpredictability and tactics to matches. Most importantly though, it provides an opportunity for a wrong decision to be overturned."
How it works
- Only a captain or nominated co-captain can challenge a decision. Should the captain or co-captain be off the field, another player can be nominated to take his place;
- Each team is allowed one unsuccessful challenge per game;
- The only decision that can be challenged are ones which involve a structured restart of play (e.g penalty, scrum, drop-out, etc.);
- Challenges will not be permitted where the referee allows play to proceed.
Greenberg said the implementation of the captain’s challenge was an example of the game listening to fans.
"At the end of last season, we conducted a fan survey and the biggest issue they raised was the impact of an incorrect decision on the game," he said.
"The Commission has listened to our fans, taken on board what they said and brought in an innovation which gives clubs the opportunity to overturn a wrong decision."
NRL head of football Graham Annesley said he would continue working with clubs to ensure all captains were clear on the system.
"There were multiple captain’s challenges on the weekend and the system worked well, with feedback from our broadcasters also positive," he said.
"We have spent a lot of time explaining the system to our clubs, players, media and broadcast partners and that will continue in the lead up to round one."
Replies
I've been for this ever since they trialled it in the NYC. Many sports have challenge systems now including the NFL, tennis and cricket. There are faults in all systems but this should help reduce some criticism. If a referee gets a call wrong and the players challenge it then the correct call gets made, if the players don't challenge it then it's on them. Of course the focus should be on the refs getting their calls right. This should really be used to prevent the howler and given they only have one unsuccessful challenge, I doubt you'll see teams using it to slow the opposition or challenge a 50/50 unless they're desperate.
The problem is the video ref still gets things wrong so what happens to the team that challenges yet get denied by blatant mistake by video ref. They then also lose the right to appeal further incorrect decisions as well as getting call overturned, meaning they are punished more than once.
It also means referees may be more reluctant to make a call that results in a restart of play as they may be overruled by a challenge. Confidence is a massive factor in referee performance and they lack confidence as it is. Puting in a review system will only hurt their confidence further leading to more mistakes.
As for teams using it to slow the play or challenge 50/50s it will happen. Every rule change is exploited by coaches now and this will not be any different. Paul McGregor has already stated he is looking at tactical use of the system and is thinking of using paddles of green and red to indicate to the players on field whether they should challenge after seeing video of incident. 10sec doesn't sound like much but it is enough time to see a replay and alert players which means more standing around prior to a tap, drop out or hand over
Stupid idea. Also the penalty for tackling an attacking player in the air. Two rules that won't improve the game yet other areas that scream out for changes they do nothing.
The way I see it is this will work for us when we play teams like the storm where we constantly get bad calls