The Bunker

[mxlegend99]

Bunch of Phil Goulds in here. Complaining about a try that should never have been a try being disallowed because it looked good and it was a soft obstruction call.

There was a forward pass. So it shouldn't have been a try. The right decision was made. If it was awarded Tigers would have had reason to be pissed. Being disallowed might suck but theres an obvious forward pass. Bunker just fixed the touchies mistake.

Its a shame they couldnt replace touchies altogether. They dont do anything. They missed Warriors taking the ball out to prevent a 40/20 and they scored moments later.

Touchies should be getting hammered more than the bunker.

 

[Hawkins]

a classic shepherd that Woods milked for all it was worth.

I thought he'd been shot.

some better technology to track the trajectory of the ball from hand ?????

Hotspot?

 

[Iafeta]

Bunch of Phil Goulds in here. Complaining about a try that should never have been a try being disallowed because it looked good and it was a soft obstruction call.

There was a forward pass. So it shouldn't have been a try. The right decision was made. If it was awarded Tigers would have had reason to be pissed. Being disallowed might suck but theres an obvious forward pass. Bunker just fixed the touchies mistake.

Its a shame they couldnt replace touchies altogether. They dont do anything. They missed Warriors taking the ball out to prevent a 40/20 and they scored moments later.

Touchies should be getting hammered more than the bunker.

So that I'm clear, you're essentially saying it was the correct decision by advocating that the Bunker should now adjudicate on matters they have jurisdiction over? Man, we are in for some fun finals if that's the new line in the sand. Should they wait until a try scoring movement, or should they just essentially become a third referee and give tips to the referees on forward passes (which as we know are quite contentious anyway). Or is it just ok in this instance because it was the Warriors and she'll be right? Interested to know where you draw the line in the sand, its either all in, or its a lets stuff it up once and do it right type scenario.

All I can say is as much as the blokes in charge are doing a terrible job, thank god you aren't in charge. The inmates would be running he asylum.

 

[Iafeta]

we're going to the Bunker to any reason not to give a try

Warriors screwed twice today by incompetent refeering

Second one I have no problem with TBF. Shaun Johnson cut back 20 metres behind the line and then ran behind a player in an offside position before running into that exact channel where the offside player was.

IIRC, earlier this year I was shot down on this very forum for suggesting this happens when people were posting for 'black and white' decisions. Fact of the matter is, while Shaun's is an obvious one, it happens 5-10 times in a game where a winger or a centre will cut back against the grain and go behind a player. In most cases the defender does not engage the offside attacker to make it blatantly obvious like Woods did yesterday (smart play IMO), but it happens game in game out without anyone raising an eyebrow because its the flow of the game.

 

[Paullyboy]

I only saw the SJ one, and that was the most textbook obstruction I've ever seen. How is that even being considered as slightly contentious? The real issue is that the ref somehow missed it during the running of play.

On that note - when are players going to get a brain. Surely SJ knew he'd run behind his player, why wouldn't he take the tackle from the fullback so it couldn't be checked?

 

[Iafeta]

Agree with the above. It was a crazy play from Shaun. I was amazed the ref even allowed it to progress. It was deadset textbook obstruction. Yes, Woods played for it, but yes, Ata Hingano also moved forward a few steps as well and did nothing to get out of the way.

 

[Snappy]

So that I'm clear, you're essentially saying it was the correct decision by advocating that the Bunker should now adjudicate on matters they have jurisdiction over? Man, we are in for some fun finals if that's the new line in the sand. Should they wait until a try scoring movement, or should they just essentially become a third referee and give tips to the referees on forward passes (which as we know are quite contentious anyway). Or is it just ok in this instance because it was the Warriors and she'll be right? Interested to know where you draw the line in the sand, its either all in, or its a lets stuff it up once and do it right type scenario.

All I can say is as much as the blokes in charge are doing a terrible job, thank god you aren't in charge. The inmates would be running he asylum.

My take on the gist of his post, is that yes there were multiple ref errors. Both on field and bunker. However when it comes down to it, there was a clear as day forward pass, and as such NZ fans should untwist their panties. One ref error was in favour of your team, and the other ref error was against your team.

Either way, there was an illegal play in the lead up to the 'try' and therefore it shouldnt be a try.

 

[ozenzud]

I only saw the SJ one, and that was the most textbook obstruction I've ever seen. How is that even being considered as slightly contentious? The real issue is that the ref somehow missed it during the running of play.

On that note - when are players going to get a brain. Surely SJ knew he'd run behind his player, why wouldn't he take the tackle from the fullback so it couldn't be checked?

What you are saying is ridiculous. You must simply want to wind up people. Players always run behind their own players in game scenarios. Every kick where there are players in front, every fullback on the return, any run from dummy half, every backdoor play, every sissors play, every old fashioned run around play was a shephard. With your interpretation a fullback running across field from a deep kick, is an illegal play because he runs behind his own players who might be 30 metres away.

The interpretation is whether the defender is impeded from making a tackle because a player runs behind a player from their own team. And Woods was not impended as Johnson was a long way back and would never have got to him. End of story, but instead, we get an end of common sense.

These bullsh&t decisions are making me completely lose interest in RL. If I wanted confusing and difficult to understand I'll watch Rugby. I think I will find something better to do on weekends than watch this crap. Really pi$$ed me off.

 

[ozenzud]

AND, Woods knew he could not make the tackle so he deliberately ran into the defender and milked it and now people think its text book shepherd. That makes me even angrier that the officials fell for that. Exactly the same thing happened in the previous call. Player runs into the back of the defender and calls for obstruction. Rugby league players are men, not soccer players. Carry on with that shit you can pi$$ off to soccer.

 

[POPEYE]

What really matters is that everyone's precious 'finals' are about to begin, being the lottery they've always been with injury, shit refereeing and absenteeism all we need is slow motion video manipulation added to the broth . . . lotsa luck convincing average IQ's the best teams will win

 

[mxlegend99]

So that I'm clear, you're essentially saying it was the correct decision by advocating that the Bunker should now adjudicate on matters they have jurisdiction over? Man, we are in for some fun finals if that's the new line in the sand. Should they wait until a try scoring movement, or should they just essentially become a third referee and give tips to the referees on forward passes (which as we know are quite contentious anyway). Or is it just ok in this instance because it was the Warriors and she'll be right? Interested to know where you draw the line in the sand, its either all in, or its a lets stuff it up once and do it right type scenario.

All I can say is as much as the blokes in charge are doing a terrible job, thank god you aren't in charge. The inmates would be running he asylum.

Im saying it shouldnt have been a try due to a massive forward pass. It wasnt a try due to an obstruction, and yeah it was soft but there was an obstruction to penalise. The touchies f**ked up before the bunker had to rule on it, the bunker found something to get technical on and come up with the right result.

At the end of the day if it's the right decision how can you complain?

The greater injustice would have been to award a try despite a clear forward pass. THAT would have been the wrong decision. The blame just goes to the useless touchies. Not the bunker.

I don't care what team gets the decisions. Much prefer the right outcome even if it's not through the right people doing it.

 

[redvscotty]

Meh, forward passes rightly or wrongly cannot be reviewed.

If the 67 blokes on the field can't get it right then play on.

 

[big hit!]

piece of shit is this bunker thing. Taking the feel and soul out of the game.

On field officials aren't making decisions because of fear of it being wrong when it goes upstairs and is replayed 20 times. By that stage, the air is out of the balloon if it is a try.

These harry high pants on the sidelines getting paid a grand a week as glorified f**king flag waivers is one of the biggest blights on the game. How the f**k do sideline officials in soccer get 99 of 100 offside calls correct, whereas these lopers down the sideline of a rugby league field freeze in the headlights when they're called upon for their one or two moments to properly officiate? Most of the time they're in the wrong position. The referees dept is as much to blame for not being able to get the 4 officials each week to manage the game in the most efficient way and keeping the feel of the game on the park rather than in a video room in the city. KFC must get a return on their investment I suppose.

We don't need these sideline f**kers putting their flags up for measly goal conversions or balls clearly going out of play. They should be side on to the ball in hand at all times and forward passes should be one of their critical domains. fix up their positioning and make sure theyre sticking to it.

 

[Paullyboy]

What you are saying is ridiculous. You must simply want to wind up people. Players always run behind their own players in game scenarios. Every kick where there are players in front, every fullback on the return, any run from dummy half, every backdoor play, every sissors play, every old fashioned run around play was a shephard. With your interpretation a fullback running across field from a deep kick, is an illegal play because he runs behind his own players who might be 30 metres away.

The interpretation is whether the defender is impeded from making a tackle because a player runs behind a player from their own team. And Woods was not impended as Johnson was a long way back and would never have got to him. End of story, but instead, we get an end of common sense.

These bullsh&t decisions are making me completely lose interest in RL. If I wanted confusing and difficult to understand I'll watch Rugby. I think I will find something better to do on weekends than watch this crap. Really pi$$ed me off.

I'm assuming you're being serious, but it took me a while to be sure. The Johnson one was the most obvious obstruction I've seen in years. As I said, I was more gobsmacked that the referee didn't pick it up on the field.

Johnson clearly ran a line against the grain back behind his players. Completely textbook. If that annoys you enough to switch sports, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[Dav0c]

Im saying it shouldnt have been a try due to a massive forward pass. It wasnt a try due to an obstruction, and yeah it was soft but there was an obstruction to penalise. The touchies f**ked up before the bunker had to rule on it, the bunker found something to get technical on and come up with the right result.

At the end of the day if it's the right decision how can you complain?

The greater injustice would have been to award a try despite a clear forward pass. THAT would have been the wrong decision. The blame just goes to the useless touchies. Not the bunker.

I don't care what team gets the decisions. Much prefer the right outcome even if it's not through the right people doing it.

The right outcome for a forward pass isn't a penalty to the to the other team therefore it was an incorrect decision.

 

[Perth Red]

These bullsh&t decisions are making me completely lose interest in RL. If I wanted confusing and difficult to understand I'll watch Rugby. I think I will find something better to do on weekends than watch this crap. Really pi$$ed me off.

Get off the couch and build a race car, its awesome and no video refs to do your head in!

 

[Leber]

Whether the pass was forward, is irrelevant.

This thread is to discuss the geniused decisions made by the bunker and that 'obstruction' call was close to the worst by the bunker.

The refs and touchies who f**ked up with the obvious forward pass should be sacked, but this thread is about the bunker, not the blokes on the field.

 

[mxlegend99]

The right outcome for a forward pass isn't a penalty to the to the other team therefore it was an incorrect decision.

But a try is the right outcome?

It happened on halftime and play didn't get to resume so penalty or crum made no difference. A try incorrectly awarded would have made a huge difference.

 

[Iafeta]

Snappy lol. You really are a weird one. Panties in a bunch is now a descriptive term for discussing an incorrect decision.

Mx, thanks for clearing that up. So you are in favour of changing the rules mid season without prior warning. That's cool. I personally don't think that's a sustainable strategy but at least I'll give you this, that warped sense of logic is interesting. I can't wait for a team to be on the end of this in the finals series. That said, I very much doubt mxs theory will see the light of day again this season which really summarises how poor a decision it was.

 

[Meth]

Archer has admitted the try should have been awarded http://www.warriors.kiwi/news/2016/08/29/archer_says_decision.html

But we all know the forward pass should have been called on field