Bunker - brilliant or bust?

The biggest single change in rugby league since the Super League divide came upon us this year in the form of the NRL Bunker. It was a system that was going to change how rugby league was run and officiated, and 16 weeks in, we take a look at how the Bunker is faring.

At a press conference not long after the 2015 Grand Final, then-Head of Football for the National Rugby League (now CEO) Todd Greenberg announced that the bunker had been approved by the ARLC and it was coming into use for season 2016.

This was a system that was going to change the way we saw every NRL match officiated, with the introduction of a centralised system - that is, being run from a single place rather than having video referees located at the stadium where the matches were being played.

In theory this seemed to be a good idea given the limited resources that officials reportedly had, often including just one screen - and at some venues those weren't even high definition. So the introduction of the bunker was going to always improve the current system (they did that massively - with an increase from one screen to 57 screens in the new facility!).

Why do we need the Bunker?

Well, to quote straight from the official release earlier this year: "The NRL has implemented the Bunker to improve the accuracy, consistency, efficiency and transparency of live in game decision making. The Bunker has been implemented in conjunction with a reduction in interchanges and the introduction of the scrum clock and dropout clock to achieve the NRL's objectives of more game continuity, tightening game stoppages and delivering a better spectacle for fans."

So has the NRL achieved it's outcomes with the Bunker? Well at a macro level, I would say it has - but still wouldn't be given full marks just yet, because as we have already seen this year it has inherited flaws from the old system at the same time as bringing new and improved aspects to the game.

Where the Bunker has failed

The biggest flaw in a Bunker system - in any format and sport - is the fact that technology is controlled by the decision making of a human, and that although technology shows us one thing, it's down to the interpretation of an individual official that ends up being final factor. Take a look at cricket's Decision Review System (DRS) and the Australia v India test at the Adelaide Oval - all the technology and evidence showed one thing, but it was the choice of the man controlling it to interpret what the technology told him, and in one instance, got it (in most people's eyes) wrong. This is a factor that we have seen in the NRL over many years with the previous video referee format, and yet again with the new Bunker system we have managed to see decisions that defy logic of video evidence.

Since its unveiling this season, we've seen a growing reliance of technology dependence from the match officials, and after a while it takes a toll on fans. Where a game is constantly interrupted by pauses in play to send decisions up to the Bunker - particularly when they are referring decisions that are extremely obvious - is an ongoing source of frustration. As rugby league fans we have all been to games where see the referee has an unobstructed view then refers a try or no try for review that is obviously one or the other, and even the most ardent supporter of technology in sport would call it overkill. So while the overall speed of the Bunker's decision making process has been an improvement on previous years and has actually been a good thing, the growing number of referrals means the time lost really hasn't changed.

It's not all bad.

The Bunker has been implemented along with the introduction of both the scrum and dropout clocks, both measures which have sped up aspects of the game quite a lot, and with quicker decisions means that the fans are getting more action on the field, which has created more action and excitement.

So has the NRL met their own guidelines?

• A secure and remote location for review officials which is conducive to decision making;
• A reduction in the number of review officials adjudicating on decisions, aiding decision making consistency;
• A reduction in the steps required to determine reviewable decisions and faster access to every available camera angle for review officials, aiding decision making efficiency;
• The opportunity to provide live explanations of decisions, aiding decision making transparency;
• The opportunity to centralise the match review committee process and reduce the latency for live statistics capture.

There has been a reduction of personnel - with just three senior review officials over each round, sometimes less. That has seen consistencies from each individual senior review official, but then has also seen that between the them - being Bernard Sutton, Luke Patten & Ashley Klein - that there are differences of interpretation that have left fans both confused and annoyed, because the same decision is not being made across each game.

We have seen the Bunker make some remarkably excellent decisions, including those using the ability to zoom in on one of the 20 angles to spot that Marika Koroibete got a pinkie on the touch in-goal line whilst trying to score a try against the Wests Tigers in Round 7, and that the live decision was overturned. Now, had that been using the old system we'd be talking about the try and possibly how it helped Melbourne to a win in regulation time, rather than it going into Golden Point in what was a fantastic contest.

The Bunker has also allowed us to hear and even see what is going on during the decision making process, and given us clarity and understanding of what they are generally looking at (rather than sitting there saying to ourselves "what the hell are they checking" or "what's taking so long"). We as fans now know what is happening, and in turn it has helped the majority of fans to a greater understanding of the process.

The final point is where the NRL failed for the bulk of the season - the match review process was supposed to be centralised and charges were to be released soon after the game. We didn't see that happen until Round 10, and the consistency has not been there to the extent that people want in various charges.

One point that gets forgotten and not noticed when on TV (but is noticeable at games) is that of live stats. With games being operated by the Bunker rather than a console at the ground, fans now have the ability to see the stats for the game 'real-time'. Personally, I find it a great tool at the game to get an even better sense of what is going on.

Grade: B+

Overall, it's fair to say the Bunker has been working at an excellent rate, with the addition of it being relatively successful. The rapid increase in decision making time, the ability to change decisions where necessary and even the addition of the scrum/drop-out clocks have helped fans watch more football. And although the Bunker has been working at a great rate, there will always be inconsistencies and flaws through decision making - but I think the system has worked and will continually improve if the NRL can listen to players, coaches and fans to continually rebuild confidence in an officiating system that has suffered a significant trust deficit in recent years.