The NRL Bunker was introduced with much fanfare and the promise of improving the accuracy, consistency, efficiency and transparency of the decision review process.
It has conversely become a significant source of frustration among fans, players, referees and commentators.
The inconsistency in rulings on penalties, tries, knock-ons, dangerous tackles, professional fouls, sin-bins, foul play and send-offs has raised serious concerns about its effectiveness.
Remotely positioned, The Bunker is powered by a world-class fibre network connecting almost every NRL venue, and is equipped with 57 monitors to facilitate the review process.
In a surprise that will come to nobody, the technology and its promise of impartiality are undermined by the human element involved in its operations.
Each game has two officials in the Bunker, as well as an on-field referee and two touch judges, making each match subject to the varying sensitivities, preferences and decision-making processes of different officials.
It's not enough to simply require the official to have a qualification and some experience. In any judicial system, rulings and determinations can still be vastly different, depending on the judge, panel or jury.
The NRL Bunker is located at a centralised facility located at Australian Technology Park in Eveleigh, Sydney. One of the more common criticisms is that referees watching a screen could advise or even overrule a decision made by a referee who is on-field at the game.
For each NRL match, a Review Official and a Senior Review Official oversee the decision review process.
But the fundamental issue with the Bunker lies in its reliance on different officials for each game. This variability introduces human error and inconsistency, despite the advanced technology at their disposal.
The Bunker is intended to be the true constant, the final arbiter in contentious decisions, but the involvement of different people game-to-game results in subjective judgments.
A Potential Solution
To address these inconsistencies, the NRL must implement a more streamlined and consistent approach by appointing a dedicated, full-time team of five qualified officials with experience refereeing at the NSW Cup or Queensland Cup level.
These referees would work full-time in the Bunker, overseeing all eight matches each round. This team would operate under a designated captain who would be responsible for single dialogue communication with the on-field referee.
Within this proposed system, the Bunker would function as a collaborative environment, with officials discussing and reaching a consensus on major calls such as captain's challenges, tries and foul play. The same time constraints would apply, with the Bunker captain monitoring response time.
Decisions would be made based on the majority opinion of the five officials, ensuring a more consistent and reliable review process.
Those of us who have watched a game of footy with a few mates know what it's like to see something happen in real-time, and for a consensus to be reached quickly on what the ruling should be.
At a higher level, former players and seasoned commentators on broadcasts already appear to offer that discussion and consensus approach, and are often the ones who are the first to be surprised when a decision comes through from The Bunker which is contentious and confusing.
By standardising the officials in The Bunker, the NRL would reduce the variability and subjectivity currently plaguing the system, providing a more consistent and fair experience for all involved in the sport.
The implementation of this solution could restore confidence in The Bunker's ability to make accurate and impartial decisions, aligning with the original goals of the technology.
