They have to do something about the Refs

[tigertiger]

Did anyone see The Roast today? They replayed the drop goal by Inu, but more importantly the audio between the two referees after it happened, Cummins can be heard saying 'Maxi, no short kick off, no short kick off!', Maxwell responds with, 'it's over mate, that's it'

...meaning, HE THOUGHT THE GAME WAS CONTINUING AFTER THE DROP GOAL!!!!!

If this doesn't prove we have inept referees controlling our game, I don't know what does, all referees need to be sacked involved in that game. Sacked, not stood down. What a farce.

 

[M2D2]

I dont think that proves refs are inept, it just shows them they are stupid and got caught up with their emotions forgetting about what GP means.
Refs are inept tho.

 

[jonno_knights]

Watching the Q Cup ATM. They have one ref and very limited video ref intervention due to only a couple cameras at the ground. The one ref makes 99.9% of the calls, and he's got them all right so far. I think the standard of refs in the NRL is poor.

I think a lot of it comes down to a mental mindset. They know they are reffing to an audience, and it puts pressure on them that they are unable to cope with.

Add the fact that Hollywood Bill is instilling his arrogance in a lot of the refs, which makes it 10x worse, because in their eyes they can never be wrong, and hence cannot learn from mistakes. Also they are rarely made accountable.

 

[Billythekid]

Watching the Q Cup ATM. They have one ref and very limited video ref intervention due to only a couple cameras at the ground. The one ref makes 99.9% of the calls, and he's got them all right so far. I think the standard of refs in the NRL is poor.

Well in the NRL they don't have to make decision and i think over time they have lost the ability too.

 

[jimmythehand]

Both teams got bad calls like every game, only one team had those calls directly affecting the score board either by giving or denying a try.

so what does it matter if it's directly or indirectly affecting the scoreboard? Either way it directly changes how the rest of the game flows and hence the outcome of the game. The dogs might have been up by 20 if all those dodgy calls hadn't gone the tigers way and then no-one would care if the last dogs try was allowed or not.

 

[firechild]

so what does it matter if it's directly or indirectly affecting the scoreboard? Either way it directly changes how the rest of the game flows and hence the outcome of the game. The dogs might have been up by 20 if all those dodgy calls hadn't gone the tigers way and then no-one would care if the last dogs try was allowed or not.

You're drawing a very long bow. The dogs could have failed to find touch from a penalty, they might have dropped it after taking the tap, anything could have happened. It's very different to a situation where points were directly effected.

 

[no name]

Well in the NRL they don't have to make decision and i think over time they have lost the ability too.

Having the VR encourages indecision amongst the referee ranks.
They hesitate on making decisions in the hope that the play ends up in goal.
Even at times when there is no way in hell a try has been scored the refs go to the VR to find how play should be restarted.

 

[Mr Saab]

Did anyone see The Roast today? They replayed the drop goal by Inu, but more importantly the audio between the two referees after it happened, Cummins can be heard saying 'Maxi, no short kick off, no short kick off!', Maxwell responds with, 'it's over mate, that's it'

...meaning, HE THOUGHT THE GAME WAS CONTINUING AFTER THE DROP GOAL!!!!!

If this doesn't prove we have inept referees controlling our game, I don't know what does, all referees need to be sacked involved in that game. Sacked, not stood down. What a farce.

That was a joke. Cummins has been a mess of a referee ever since the roosters souffs game in 2007 when he lost control.
The tosser does not even know the rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jimmythehand]

You're drawing a very long bow. The dogs could have failed to find touch from a penalty, they might have dropped it after taking the tap, anything could have happened. It's very different to a situation where points were directly effected.

Yes I am drawing a very low bow, and so is every other poster. The fact is that had Reynolds been ruled offside for the first try, then NONE of whatever happened after that would have happened.

If Jackons knock back had not been ruled a knock on then NONE of what happened after that would have happened.

If Ennis's strip and knock back and been ruled correctly the Tigers wouldn't have had their GOLDEN opportunity to win the game, which, NEWS BREAK, they didn't take.

Both teams copped bad calls at crucial times, to say that some are more crucial than others is just ridiculous unless you're talking about a decision on the last play of the game.

I'll also put it to you that the Dog's ridiculous try fired the Tigers up so much that they were able to score their last try. You could see how energised they were. Without that incentive they might never have got there.

 

[jimmythehand]

Did anyone see The Roast today? They replayed the drop goal by Inu, but more importantly the audio between the two referees after it happened, Cummins can be heard saying 'Maxi, no short kick off, no short kick off!', Maxwell responds with, 'it's over mate, that's it'

...meaning, HE THOUGHT THE GAME WAS CONTINUING AFTER THE DROP GOAL!!!!!

If this doesn't prove we have inept referees controlling our game, I don't know what does, all referees need to be sacked involved in that game. Sacked, not stood down. What a farce.

Seriously I don't think that's an inept call at all, it's just a case of auto-pilot and habit taking over after running around for over 2 hours.

What I find interesting though is what he said. "NO short kick-off, no short kickoff." What the **@* is that meant to mean? I've got $500 on the dogs and I don't want the tigers a chance to score? Did he really say that or is that a misquote?

 

[Card Shark]

Yes something does need to be done about the refs but the situation needs to be put in perspective a bit.

A Rugby League ref has to make a decision just about every few seconds of every game i.e was that pass forward, is the defence back 10, was he in front of the kicker, was that a strip, is he holding down. The list goes on & on.

The NRL must come up with ways of supporting them. The captain's challenge & getting rid of the refs ears would be a good start. The video ref box needs 2 in it - an ex-ref who knows the rules & an ex-player to offer a practical view.

The refs aren't that bad - imagine if we had soccer refs who make 1/4 of the decisions but have 5 times as many major blunders.

 

[firechild]

Yes something does need to be done about the refs but the situation needs to be put in perspective a bit.

A Rugby League ref has to make a decision just about every few seconds of every game i.e was that pass forward, is the defence back 10, was he in front of the kicker, was that a strip, is he holding down. The list goes on & on.

The NRL must come up with ways of supporting them. The captain's challenge & getting rid of the refs ears would be a good start. The video ref box needs 2 in it - an ex-ref who knows the rules & an ex-player to offer a practical view.

The refs aren't that bad - imagine if we had soccer refs who make 1/4 of the decisions but have 5 times as many major blunders.

There were 3 in the box at Brookie yesterday arvo. Good initiative.

 

[Frailty]

- Go back to one referee - This limits top grade referees to 8 and makes it more competitive to get a spot.

- Remove the video referee - Creates more problems than it has solved IMO. Referees and touch judges do not work to position themselves to get a view of the game, and even if they do 9 times out of 10 they will not make a decision themselves. Also has led to players staying down to get a penalty.

- Reinstate In goal judges - To compensate for the loss of any benefit the video ref brought, in goal judges would allow another set of eyes.

 

[ceagle]

Bring back only one ref and have only 4 regular refs to use, they can back up and ref 2 games a round.

Players will finally understand different refs styles and there would be a lot more consistency.

 

[StormHi]

- Go back to one referee - This limits top grade referees to 8 and makes it more competitive to get a spot.

- Remove the video referee - Creates more problems than it has solved IMO. Referees and touch judges do not work to position themselves to get a view of the game, and even if they do 9 times out of 10 they will not make a decision themselves. Also has led to players staying down to get a penalty.

- Reinstate In goal judges - To compensate for the loss of any benefit the video ref brought, in goal judges would allow another set of eyes.

Would be pretty much perfect.

I just want to see the Video ref being used as a last resort instead of a first resort if that makes sense?

 

[Pierced Soul]

I fail to see how the broncos got dudded. .

well unless the rules of the game changed to allow you to drop the ball over the try line i'd say we were dudded.

 

[StormHi]

What part of "there was no clear separation" do you guys not understand?? That Put down by Sisa was why the BOTD rule is in place. 50/50 call went in favor of the attacking side. Diddnt hear Griffon or any of the Broncs complaining just their one eyed dipstick supporters.

And poor Wally who like pretty much 90% of the Broncos fans got caught up in Hadleys soapbox Hyperbole.........

 

[Rosetta]

It's questionable if they can even be referred to as referees at this time, they are game managers as far as I'm concerned and have been for ~5 seasons.

Until the art of refereeing is stripped back to the basics of discretion and feel nothing will change.

 

[Pierced Soul]

What part of "there was no clear separation" do you guys not understand?? That Put down by Sisa was why the BOTD rule is in place. 50/50 call went in favor of the attacking side. Diddnt hear Griffon or any of the Broncs complaining just their one eyed dipstick supporters.

And poor Wally who like pretty much 90% of the Broncos fans got caught up in Hadleys soapbox Hyperbole.........

so you saw no gap? are you paul simpkins?

that particular example is not why BOTD was brought in. it was put in place for situations such as Farrah's no try where the ball couldnt clearly be seen but from the various angles the benefit of the doubt was that some part of the ball must have touched the ground (they f**ked that one up as well)

but hey maybe you like the idea of dropped balls being classified as tries, go watch AFL where missed kicks get you one point

 

[M2D2]

Hes still got one hand on the ball as it starts to come out. Try.