Toovey lets it rip

[butchmcdick]

Manly Sea Eagles coach Geoff Toovey takes aim at NRL referees after semi-final loss to Canterbury Bulldogs
Posted about an hour agoSun 21 Sep 2014, 6:48am


PHOTO: Not a happy man ... Manly coach Geoff Toovey at training. (AAP: Paul Miller, file photo)
RELATED STORY: Bulldogs edge Manly in golden point semi-final triumph
MAP: Manly 2095
Manly coach Geoff Toovey was again left bemoaning a referee's undue influence on the outcome of a contest after the Sea Eagles bowed out of the NRL premiership race.

They were left cursing their luck when referee Gerard Sutton was hit by a fifth-tackle kick from Canterbury playmaker Josh Reynolds late in their 18-17 golden-point loss on Saturday night.

Sutton ruled he had affected the play and initially awarded a scrum feed to the Sea Eagles, but after a couple of seconds correctly amended the decision and gave the Bulldogs a scrum feed that led to six more tackles 20 metres from from Manly's line.

From the ensuing set of six, half-back Trent Hodkinson landed a field goal to put the Dogs 17-16 ahead in the 75th minute before his Manly counterpart Daly Cherry-Evans returned the favour in the 79th minute to put the game into extra time.

"So much for referees not having a direct outcome on the result of the game," Toovey said.

"Let's face it, that is what happened.

"It was the last tackle and it hits the ref, they get the feed and they kick the field goal."

The Manly mentor said he did not think it was a deliberate ploy from Reynolds, saying he thought "it was just a poor kick".

I can't change the rule or the result ... the whole thing is ridiculous.
Geoff Toovey on the NRL's zero-tolerance punching policy
Toovey was also left shaking his head over the NRL's 'one punch and you are off' rule after both Sea Eagles prop Josh Starling and Canterbury forward Reni Maitua were sin-binned for striking.

Starling reacted to a 'chicken wing' tackle from Bulldogs back-rower Josh Jackson in the 23rd minute.

Maitua punched James Hasson in a melee, which followed Cheyse Blair's 71st-minute try that levelled the scores at 16-16.

"You retaliate and you get 10 minutes," Toovey said of Starling's sin-binning.

"I can't change the rule or the result ... the whole thing is ridiculous.

"A bloke can grab your shirt and punch you in the head and a bloke hits back and he gets 10 minutes ... and when you arm-lock a bloke, you don't get 10 minutes.

"The whole thing is out of control."

Jackson was put on report for the chicken wing and could miss Saturday's preliminary final with Penrith.

Last year, Toovey famously claimed there needed to be an investigation into NRL refereeing after a decision went against his side in a loss to South Sydney.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-...-up-at-referees-after-semi-final-loss/5758420

So this years biggest whinge after being knocked out of the semi's goes to

 

[AlwaysGreen]

It does seem unreasonable that the bulldogs got six more tackles after it hit the ref. simple rule change: take the play back to the last play the ball and restart that tackle, just like they do when players don't hear a held call.

Toovey's just a born whinger. Even I f he was being showered by $100 notes and being tit f**k by kate upton he'd still whinge at his press conference.

 

[Loose Cannon]

How does someone who has played and coached at the highest level not understand the rules? Pretty sure it happens at the other end, he has no issues. Whinge. Whinge, whinge.

 

[Stagger Lee]

How would Toovey go as the coach of the NQ Cowboys, would he self combust?

 

[Loose Cannon]

It does seem unreasonable that the bulldogs got six more tackles after it hit the ref. simple rule change: take the play back to the last play the ball and restart that tackle, just like they do when players don't hear a held call.

It's not that simple.

When a player is called held the ball isn't in play and there is a definitive reference point to restart. What if Canterbury run 50m before they kick? Where do you restart? It's not fair to send them all the way back. A play in motion is never redone and never should be.

The rule only comes into play maybe 3-4 times a season. It's one of the odd ones regarding the restart but that's the way it is, and I can't see alternative which is viable.

 

[thorson1987]

Well, if the refs had given Manly the scrum instead of correctly giving it to the Dogs, they would have directly influenced the game by a clear incorrect call.

As it is, the call was 100% correct (eventually) so you can't say the refs had a direct outcome on the result.

 

[thorson1987]

How does someone who has played and coached at the highest level not understand the rules? Pretty sure it happens at the other end, he has no issues. Whinge. Whinge, whinge.

Yep.

Say Manly have the Dogs pinned on their try line on the last tackle with 1 minute to go. Hokko goes to boot the ball downfield, miss hits it and it hits the ref.

Manly would get the scrum feed 10m from the tryline with a full set of 6.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

It's not that simple.

When a player is called held the ball isn't in play and there is a definitive reference point to restart. What if Canterbury run 50m before they kick? Where do you restart? It's not fair to send them all the way back. A play in motion is never redone and never should be.

The rule only comes into play maybe 3-4 times a season. It's one of the odd ones regarding the restart but that's the way it is, and I can't see alternative which is viable.

If it only happens 3-4 times in a season then taking it back that time they run 50 metres isn't much of a disadvantage in the greater scheme of things. With every game televised the point where it needs to go back is easily referenced.

 

[butchmcdick]

How would Toovey go as the coach of the NQ Cowboys, would he self combust?

He's out whinged the cows this season

 

[gunpk]

I also think it is funny that you can punch a guy in the head and if you're holding the guys shirt you don't get binned. I understand why they made the no punching rule but I think the only difference between Starling and the Dogs player he was fighting was that the Dogs player held his jersey while doing it

 

[Danish]

All they need to do is change the rule so the defensive team based on territory gets the ball, so last night manly would have got it back OR if the dogs were coming out of their own end and it hit the ref they'd get a fresh set.

That change means the ruling will always have minimal impact on the game. Pretty simple really.

 

[hellteam]

It is a stupid rule but rules are rules. I'd probably rather just see that particular play be replayed. So it goes back to the previous play the ball. seems fairer.

Anyway, maybe kicking the ball at the ref should become a legit 5th tackle tactic. Guaranteed six more tackles. There's two of them to aim at too.....

 

[butchmcdick]

All they need to do is change the rule so the defensive team based on territory gets the ball, so last night manly would have got it back OR if the dogs were coming out of their own end and it hit the ref they'd get a fresh set.

That change means the ruling will always have minimal impact on the game. Pretty simple really.

The rule as it is has minimal impact on games.

Apart from last night I can't remember it being used this year

 

[Loose Cannon]

If it only happens 3-4 times in a season then taking it back that time they run 50 metres isn't much of a disadvantage in the greater scheme of things. With every game televised the point where it needs to go back is easily referenced.

No, because you can't replay a play. That will never change and nor should it. There are no second chances.

 

[nick87]

why not just make it play on? Like the posts?
I mean if a kicker thinks they can hit a moving target with a kick and it will advantage their team, so be it, good luck to them

 

[Loose Cannon]

All they need to do is change the rule so the defensive team based on territory gets the ball, so last night manly would have got it back OR if the dogs were coming out of their own end and it hit the ref they'd get a fresh set.

That change means the ruling will always have minimal impact on the game. Pretty simple really.

But then the ref gets in the way on the first tackle and the attacking team loses 5 close to the line. They will whinge about that too. You can't please all the people all the time.

 

[Game_Breaker]

All they need to do is change the rule so the defensive team based on territory gets the ball, so last night manly would have got it back OR if the dogs were coming out of their own end and it hit the ref they'd get a fresh set.

That change means the ruling will always have minimal impact on the game. Pretty simple really.

The only issue is if it happens between 40m and halfway, a fresh set there in golden point will have an impact, unlikely to happen but its there to be exploited.

I do agree with your rule change though, but not a fresh set.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

No, because you can't replay a play. That will never change and nor should it. There are no second chances.

I'm pretty sure setting a scrum and getting a whole new set of six is a pretty f**king big second chance, especially when that scrum is set where it hits the ref.

But fair enough, scrap the scrum and the resultant six and play the ball on that spot as if it was a tackle. If it was the fifth tackle make it a handover.

 

[Card Shark]

Why can't Toovey accept the loss like a man!

Paul Green probably has more reason to complain but he said they weren't good enough,

I didnt watch the game but followed it on here. Many were laughing at how bad Manly were going.

Did Toovey criticise any of his players directly...I doubt it.

 

[Loose Cannon]

The rule as it is has minimal impact on games.

Apart from last night I can't remember it being used this year

The only other similar instance was the Warriors v Knights.

Knights feed 10 out from their own, run the blind and score the length. I think it was Johnson claimed the ref impeded his tackle on Mullen allowing the overlap. Wasn't called back though and the try stood.

Kimmorley on commentary was adamant a scrum was the fair result, but of course he had no idea of the rules meaning Auckland would get the feed 10 out, making the alternative unfair also.

Until someone can offer a fair alternative under all conditions, the rule shouldn't change.