It takes a special kind of gutlessness to lay down on Anzac day.
But crying and complaining that everyone is against you is heroic right?
It seems you are the one who doesn't know what you are talking about. The bunker did intervene.
Archer addressed those criticisms, telling NRL.com that review officials Jared Maxwell and Bryan Norrie were right to prompt on-field referee Ben Cummins to blow the vital penalty.
What? That doesn't disprove anything I said. Are you telling me that you believe the bunker told the refs to stop play and award a penalty, but then said "no wait, we better watch the video for 2 minutes first. That'll fool them", before awarding the penalty?
I've already explained it once for you. You can't be this stupid.
Did you also see Buettner's comments refuting your bullshit "he wasn't charged so it can't be a penalty" comment?
You are also extremely selective with the stats you choose to trot out. We may have an 7-8 win loss record under Cummins but we have won 2 penalty counts in those 15 games. When you consider more recent results it justifies robinsons outburst.
Don't Roosters fans like to tell everyone they've won about 5 penalty counts in the last 25 years? Based on the constant moaning, Cummins' percentage sounds like it would be quite high compared to other refs.
According to the Fox Sports Lab, since winning the 2013 grand final with Cummins as assistant referee, the Roosters record under him stands at three wins from 10 since 2014 despite claiming two minor premierships in that same period, and they?ve failed to win a penalty count with Cummins in charge.
And? Winning records with no context are irrelevant as a few of us have tried to point out to you on multiple occasions.
He reffed 8 games over those 2 years (You have a 50% record with him this year, and a 0% record without him, so clearly he is biased towards you this year. That's how it works right?). You won games over the Dragons and Bulldogs, both games you were expected to win. Now lets look at your other opponents.
Lost to the Sharks twice in 2015. Obviously biased. How could you lose twice to them? Lets look at your recent history against them. Over 2013-2015 when the Roosters finished minor premiers every year (Sharks finished 5th, 16th and 6th), your record against them is 2 wins and 4 losses. Now you've told us you only lost 2 of them because of Cummins, but what about the others? Perenara was a ref for all 4 (2 wins and 2 losses), but the 2nd ref is different each time, so obviously we can't accuse another ref of bias. Lets go a little bit further back to 2010. Your record is now 3 wins, 1 draw and 7 losses. Your regular season win percentage in that time is 59% compared to the Sharks 41%. How is it even possible that there could be such a huge discrepancy? Obviously it's just bias of some sort. There can be no other explanation.
So that's clear bias by Cummins displayed in 2 of the losses, what about the other 4?
You also lost to Melbourne in week 1 of the finals in 2015. Pretty shocking. Roosters were leading the head to head from 2013-2015 by 3-2. Surely that's a guaranteed win? Oh the Roosters were missing Pearce and JWH? Definitely the refs fault that Maloney missed a goal.
Now for 2014. You lost to Manly and their 16-8 record. Wait, isn't that the same record as the Roosters finished on? Hang on, Manly also won the other game that year? Clearly Cummins must have reffed them both? There's no way they would lose without Cummins as ref.
I've ridiculed you a few times already about how you think you should be guaranteed a win over the premiers, so I think I can skip the 2 losses against Souths, as it will just be more of the same.
The random intervention of the bunker is frustrating for everyone. Are saints fans not appalled that the bunker doesn't tell the ref that our second try is a knock on and completely miss it yet intervene on napas tackle?
How does Cummins not check that try given it was scramble. They either intervene for all or otherwise just for tries, dropouts etc.
Uh they didn't intervene because Cummins awarded it straight away. There would have been no time to have a look.
Isn't this kinda proof by the way about how you are wrong regarding the circumstances behind them looking at the Napa tackle?
