Referee's

[Spudd]

I must say I saw an interesting one with SKD ; actually punched the ball forward deliberately over Nightingale's head and regathered. Has the rules changed? Maybe bunker ruled SKD accidentally punched forward.

Good luck Knights it was your turn for the ref's rub tonight

I noticed that too. He intentionally promoted the ball forward.
But I'm guessing the bunker temporarily forgot that rule. :/
We didn't deserve to win but the refs didn't help matters much.

 

[Old Timer]

I must say I saw an interesting one with SKD ; actually punched the ball forward deliberately over Nightingale's head and regathered. Has the rules changed? Maybe bunker ruled SKD accidentally punched forward.

Good luck Knights it was your turn for the ref's rub tonight

No it's exactly the same rule that applied when T Rex did against us when he was at the Dogs.
That rule, the no touch ref rule and the play the ball square rule are all in the book.
Needless to say only to be applied against us by the look of it.

 

[getsmarty]

A disgrace cost a game 2 tries .

Yes...but after this it was 14 - 14 all and the game was there for the taking. Good teams win Ugly...We just cannot win the tight games as our coach has no Plan B when things are not working.

 

[This Year?]

Even Joey disagreed with the Lafai no try and the Hodgkinson obstruction on the footy show this morning lol.

 

[Dragonslayer]

On the Lafai no try ruling.
Bludger, oops sorry, Badger sends it up as a no try so the Bunker really has to support the on field refs decision. If Badger sends it up as a try then wr would have heard "you can see the ball has travelled backwards of Nightingale so its play on from here and Lafai has grounded the ball we have a decision and going to the board.....try!
The same incident hapoened between the Cows and Roosters game with regards to the Hess try. There was no angle that showed the ball over the line, yet because it was sent up as a try there was insufficient evidence to overturn that. So again supporting the on-field decision.
I tend to like the RU referees (yeah i know its RU but) who send up a decision as try or no try and they let the video ref make the call.
So my point here is on both occassions the Lafai no try and the Hess try could have been sent to the Bunker as try or no try and I think then the correct ruling would have been made on both.
ATM the Bunker 99% of the time supports the onfield decision moreso as to not embarrass the onfield ref.

 

[SEAT 1A]

Disgraceful by the bunker. I don't mind if the ref thinks the ball may have gone forward and refers it to the bunker.

The ball clearly went backwards off Nighty and to say there was no clear vision is laughable and Friz didn't even push Hodkinson. Well, what can you say. They are off their head or cheats.

Clearly, they cost us the game as it cost us at least 10 points.

 

[Red V for life]

LMAO.

Archer has come out saying both no try decisions were correct.

Apparently, upon review of all angles, the evidence is clear that the ball hit Nighty's forearm, went into SKD and therefore constituted a knock-on.

The Bunker had all available angles too and could find insufficient evidence to overturn the on field decision of no try. So, who is right?

No wonder the fans have had enough. Arse covering 101.

 

[merahputih]

Regarding the Nightingale decision, the principle of " Benefit of the doubt" applied in cricket & other sports, and before the Bunker, in NRL. The technology of this $3M white elephant is obviously brilliant but the human input is stone age. There was widespread criticism from players & officials last year but the NRL in its usual fashion gagged anybody from talking about it. As others have said, we probably didn't deserve to win, but it's painful to see the continuing incompetence of bunker officials allowed to continue.

 

[getsmarty]

The Refs didn't cost us the game...it was 14 all..we should have won. We bombed plenty of chances against a side that will most likely be Wooden spooners and have now won 4 games in the last 2 seasons. .

 

[Dragon for life]

I believe the refs are restricted by only having 2 options, try or no try.

A third option, where the ref could say "no opinion" would put the onus on the Bunker, rather than the Bunker hesitating to overrule a fellow ref.

I think the third option should be called "no idea".

 

[Blood Shot Eyes]

On the Lafai no try ruling.
Bludger, oops sorry, Badger sends it up as a no try so the Bunker really has to support the on field refs decision. If Badger sends it up as a try then wr would have heard "you can see the ball has travelled backwards of Nightingale so its play on from here and Lafai has grounded the ball we have a decision and going to the board.....try!
The same incident hapoened between the Cows and Roosters game with regards to the Hess try. There was no angle that showed the ball over the line, yet because it was sent up as a try there was insufficient evidence to overturn that. So again supporting the on-field decision.
I tend to like the RU referees (yeah i know its RU but) who send up a decision as try or no try and they let the video ref make the call.
So my point here is on both occassions the Lafai no try and the Hess try could have been sent to the Bunker as try or no try and I think then the correct ruling would have been made on both.
ATM the Bunker 99% of the time supports the onfield decision moreso as to not embarrass the onfield ref.

Yep spot on and thats exactely why I started this new thread mate....actualy I laughed when someone on here said the refs should have a big raffle wheel like they do at the clubs and pubs...with ever second wording try or no try....before adjudication they spin it and see what comes up...not a bad idea at least it would quicker than the bunker....very funny.

 

[2010Dragons]

During the week I predicted that Badger will make dodgy hometown referee calls.
Yes folks he did just as I expected.
The game has become orchestrated by the powers that be to get the best result for the games. I don't know if this apart of the match fixing or the referees have already decided who they think deserves to win.
The game has become more and more like a staged show.

 

[Too old too slow]

LMAO.

Archer has come out saying both no try decisions were correct.

Apparently, upon review of all angles, the evidence is clear that the ball hit Nighty's forearm, went into SKD and therefore constituted a knock-on.

The Bunker had all available angles too and could find insufficient evidence to overturn the on field decision of no try. So, who is right?

No wonder the fans have had enough. Arse covering 101.

Has anyone ever seen Archer and Doust in the same room?

At the very least they have similar positions of office.. no accountability, inconsistent, complete disregard for the paying 'punter', poor leadership and a group of yes men working for them.

Don't forget the never ending book of excuses and the self serving absolution of obvious screw ups.

The referees are now a bureaucracy.. too many layers of decision makers... and no real accountability for poor decisions. They have had all instinct for the game removed and replaced by fear, process and indicators.

Week to week, game to game the rule interpretations change... all in all it's just another straw for the camels back... and one day they will wonder why it broke.

The game has peaked .. it needs a complete cleanout... much like our own organisation.

 

[Dennis Papaioannou]

The Refs didn't cost us the game...it was 14 all..we should have won. We bombed plenty of chances against a side that will most likely be Wooden spooners and have now won 4 games in the last 2 seasons. .

I totally agree with you.
McGregor's angry act at the press conference about the ref's decisions was only to deflect attention away from his diabolical coaching display.
I find it interesting that he chose yesterday to complain about the ref's even though he has had plenty of other reasons to do so during the season.
Not using Mann at all was also truly mystifying.
He could easily have sparked a match winning score if he was given a chance.
62% completion rate and not being able to devise anything meaningful to finish them off, is McGregor's responsibility.
We can blame the bad decisions all day but we played really dumb directionless football that ultimately cost us the 2 competition points.

 

[getsmarty]

I totally agree with you.
McGregor's angry act at the press conference about the ref's decisions was only to deflect attention away from his diabolical coaching display.
I find it interesting that he chose yesterday to complain about the ref's even though he has had plenty of other reasons to do so during the season.
Not using Mann at all was also truly mystifying.
He could easily have sparked a match winning score if he was given a chance.
62% completion rate and not being able to devise anything meaningful to finish them off, is McGregor's responsibility.
We can blame the bad decisions all day but we played really dumb directionless football that ultimately cost us the 2 competition points.

Well said Dennis.

 

[Spudd]

Regarding Nene's try. Can someone explain to me why Friz was penalised for holding back a player who was offside?

 

[Old Timer]

The absolutely lacklustre start by us going down 12 points (similar to what we did last time against them and against Manly last week) shows the poor mindset of our team and coaching staff.
We are far better as front runners rather than playing catch up but from the kick off yesterday we had a back peddling defence and it was very neatly exploited until such times as we finally had a real dig.
IMO Frizz was hampered yesterday and Duges came in early to do a lot of heavy defence to take the pressure of him and the gaps opened up down that side.
Nene then comes in off the wing to the middle & LHS and starts doing hit ups which means that the RHS attack is now out of kilter and will not function normally.
All well and good for people to say players should play with injuries well IMO Frizz and Packer are not able to complete at their normal high efficiency rate and it is stifling the ability of the side to get set in both defence and attack.

 

[Gareth67]

The refereeing situation is and has been shocking for quite some time , in my opinion , ever since the introduction of the 2 nd official . No need for him , there never was . This is yet another footy show suggestion that has come into being - Americanisation of Rugby League , absolutely wonderful for the television networks .

Hell , why don't we just remove the the 20metre and halfway lines and replace them with others staggered at every 10 metres , or have they done that already ?

As already said , they seem not to have the confidence to make a decision when it comes to actual try's , that is exactly what they are there for ! I say get back to the one ref system , puss off that bluudy bunker and for pity sake stop the refs from calling the players by name . All that does is to cause favouritism to one team or another . By following my steps they will save a lot of heartache and a hell of a lot of dollars .

 

[1st & 10]

I must say I saw an interesting one with SKD ; actually punched the ball forward deliberately over Nightingale's head and regathered. Has the rules changed? Maybe bunker ruled SKD accidentally punched forward.

Good luck Knights it was your turn for the ref's rub tonight

Dally Messenger did that, before it was ruled out . It was called the "kangaroo punch and chase" in 1908 England

 

[1st & 10]

The bunker is a joke. I thought the bunker has the capacity to zoom in on footage? Anyway a try can turn a team fortunes around. We got dudded at least twice by bad referring decisions and waste of money bunker. NRL fix your act up.

I have given up on this so called bunker. Waste of time and money