What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2022 R16 Sun - St Geo Illa 12-10 Canberra @ WIN

Round 16: St Geo Illa v Canberra

  • St George Illawarra Dragons

    Votes: 7 58.3%
  • Canberra Raiders

    Votes: 3 25.0%
  • Draw after Golden Point

    Votes: 2 16.7%

  • Total voters
    12
  • Poll closed .

St Tangles

Juniors
Messages
2,103
That's where the penalty and 'professional foul' should have been applied - he was on the ground and effectively held for nearly 3 seconds before Hunt came in from over the back and actively delayed the play further.

There were a couple of other howlers in that game that just smack of inconsistency as well... the 2 non-offside 'penalties' not given for knock-ons by the Dragons and then pick up by a player in front (particularly the one picked up by Ravalawa off the dropped kick in the Dragons 20 metre), when in the same game he blew 2 against the Raiders for doing exactly the same thing...maybe they NRL integrity Unit needs to check Peter Gough's footy tab account🤔
Or the Raiders forward pass 3 tackles before the last play
Or Rapana sliding knees first into Suli when he scored
🤔
 

St Tangles

Juniors
Messages
2,103
Found two extremely good examples.

Round 11
Sharks v Titans
Nicho Hynes sin binned 79:58 for deliberately holding down to waste time

Round 15
Cowboys v Manly
Cohen Hess sin binned 79:58 for deliberately holding down to waste time

So it definitely an option available to the referee for instances such as this
Both were in try scoring situations and not similar at all
 

SBD82

Coach
Messages
15,683
I think there should just be a little ref discretion going on. The reason why they changed the rules to a penalty inside the 40m is because coaches gamed it. Good teams were sprinting off the line on tackle 1 or 2 and smashing the ball runner knowing even if they conceded a set restart the attacking side had zero momentum.

I think if Tapine just drops the ball as he's getting to his feet he probably wins a penalty but isn't that silly ? Hunt came in so late it was deliberate.

I don't like seeing players gaming the rules in such an obvious way.
The fact that it requires the refs to have some discretion is why it’s a bad rule.

Every time the refs have been given that sort of decision making, they’ve botched it.
 

Bazal

Post Whore
Messages
93,084
The fact that it requires the refs to have some discretion is why it’s a bad rule.

Every time the refs have been given that sort of decision making, they’ve botched it.

Leaving aside the fact that they do it throughout the game (after all, 'repeated infringements' is very much discretionary), honestly I don't even think it's discretion in this case...like it's literally just a feel for the game?

It's debateable whether one hold down on the line in the 32nd minute is cynical, lazy, or a gassed player. It's pretty blatant that a hold down on the line with a 2 point lead in the 80th is cynical though.
 

Still Nutty

Juniors
Messages
859
Or the Raiders forward pass 3 tackles before the last play
Or Rapana sliding knees first into Suli when he scored
🤔


I highlighted 2 clear situations (the 'non-offside' calls) that are directly comparable with 2 of the same instances that occurred against the Raiders earlier in the same game, where the referee chose to award penalties to St George (and they were the right calls)...but, if it was right then, it also should have been right for exactly the same infringements later in the game.

So do highlight which infringements the Dragon's actually got penalised for that you are highlighting as direct inconsistencies you claim these 2 supposed 'non-calls' can be compared to...or are you just picking random events to deflect that the ref didn't apply his decisions consistently on a pretty clear infringement he called throughout the whole game?
 

St Tangles

Juniors
Messages
2,103
I highlighted 2 clear situations (the 'non-offside' calls) that are directly comparable with 2 of the same instances that occurred against the Raiders earlier in the same game, where the referee chose to award penalties to St George (and they were the right calls)...but, if it was right then, it also should have been right for exactly the same infringements later in the game.

So do highlight which infringements the Dragon's actually got penalised for that you are highlighting as direct inconsistencies you claim these 2 supposed 'non-calls' can be compared to...or are you just picking random events to deflect that the ref didn't apply his decisions consistently on a pretty clear infringement he called throughout the whole game?
I'm just adding to your whinge list.

Besides on the Rava one he came back behind the point of where the ball was touched as the ref said when he called it.

Clearly not an offside.

Better side won time to move on.
 

SBD82

Coach
Messages
15,683
Leaving aside the fact that they do it throughout the game (after all, 'repeated infringements' is very much discretionary), honestly I don't even think it's discretion in this case...like it's literally just a feel for the game?

It's debateable whether one hold down on the line in the 32nd minute is cynical, lazy, or a gassed player. It's pretty blatant that a hold down on the line with a 2 point lead in the 80th is cynical though.
I’d describe a feel for the game as a kind of discretion. I think leaving calls in that grey area is always going to cause controversy.

Even in the example that you gave, you could argue that a player is more likely to be gassed in the 80th minute. Judging intent is a minefield.
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
11,718
Both were in try scoring situations and not similar at all
In what circumstances is being inside the 10 metres red zone not a try scoring situation? Haha
You couldn’t functionally be that f**king dumb to argue this and still have the capacity to operate a device to post on this site

even most of your fan base is smart enough to concede the wrong call was made, which was confirmed by Graham Annesley today
Doesn’t matter, the saints won but christ, at least try to not the dumbest merkin this side of IBM
 

Canard

Referee
Messages
29,689
Annesley confirmed that it should have been a penalty at least 3 times during that final set.

So yeh, the ref f**ked up.
 

Canard

Referee
Messages
29,689
Definitely has absolutely nothing to do with losing one of the best halfbacks in recent history, as well as quality players like Morris, Cordner, Mitchell, since their 2019 GF team.

The rule is ridiculous. The justification that the same infringement in the 79th minute should have a different outcome from the one committed in the 35th minute is just dumb.

The Roosters cynical deliberate penalty tactic was a blight on the game, and is why this rule was brought in. It was getting to the ridiculous stage where guys like JWH were yelling at the ref to call a penalty.

It's been one of the best rule changes in years.

The ref still has discretion to call a penalty at any time.
 

baselinepanther

Juniors
Messages
2,461
IMO Annesley is splitting hairs about whether Hunt was square at marker or not , if Gough penalises there , we have Dragons fans screaming the house down because hes pretty square for mine

nope

its the flop before , thats where the penalty was
forget this 6 again crap there , its useless to the ball carrying side with 6 fricking seconds left on the clock

a penalty every day of the week & anyone who knows anything about RL could not argue
 

St Tangles

Juniors
Messages
2,103
In what circumstances is being inside the 10 metres red zone not a try scoring situation? Haha
You couldn’t functionally be that f**king dumb to argue this and still have the capacity to operate a device to post on this site

even most of your fan base is smart enough to concede the wrong call was made, which was confirmed by Graham Annesley today
Doesn’t matter, the saints won but christ, at least try to not the dumbest merkin this side of IBM
I think you take that crown by your posts.
Just because your inside the 10m red zone doesn't make it a try scoring situation that's just a stupid comment.
Better side won 2 ponts banked.
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
11,718
IMO Annesley is splitting hairs about whether Hunt was square at marker or not , if Gough penalises there , we have Dragons fans screaming the house down because hes pretty square for mine

nope

its the flop before , thats where the penalty was
forget this 6 again crap there , its useless to the ball carrying side with 6 fricking seconds left on the clock

a penalty every day of the week & anyone who knows anything about RL could not argue
Agreed
But when you go to a presser, and you’re basically going to stand up and say the ref clearly f**ked up on the two plays prior where clear penalties and sin bins should apply, what is the point in backing the referee on the third when it’s a 50/50 call

just lean all the way in and side with the aggrieved side on the 50/50
He conceded in his words whether he was square was a close call that people could disagree on.
I think he was square enough for me
But it shouldn’t matter. The play prior with the offside followed up by a flop is a penalty and sin bin

hopefully next time this occurs the referee makes the right call
 

baselinepanther

Juniors
Messages
2,461
I think you take that crown by your posts.
Just because your inside the 10m red zone doesn't make it a try scoring situation that's just a stupid comment.
Better side won 2 ponts banked.
rise above your stupidity for a sec & see the implications of this ridiculous farcical end to yesterdays game.
If it had been the Dragons on the other end of that call , you'd of had fair minded students of the game including Raiders fans stating how obviously flawed the adjudicating of the last minute of that game was. For the sake of all teams & all fans the referees need to do better in that situation
 

St Tangles

Juniors
Messages
2,103
rise above your stupidity for a sec & see the implications of this ridiculous farcical end to yesterdays game.
If it had been the Dragons on the other end of that call , you'd of had fair minded students of the game including Raiders fans stating how obviously flawed the adjudicating of the last minute of that game was. For the sake of all teams & all fans the referees need to do better in that situation
Dopes always get to name calling and overestimate their own intelligence

Better side won
Raiders had there chances they just weren't good enough
Stop crying over a 79th minute call
He calls the forward pass 3 plays before we are not even debating this
 

baselinepanther

Juniors
Messages
2,461
Dopes always get to name calling and overestimate their own intelligence

Better side won
Raiders had there chances they just weren't good enough
Stop crying over a 79th minute call
He calls the forward pass 3 plays before we are not even debating this
I have potatoes in my pantry smarter then you
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
11,718
I think you take that crown by your posts.
Just because your inside the 10m red zone doesn't make it a try scoring situation that's just a stupid comment.
Better side won 2 ponts banked.

Coen Hess was sin binned for a tackle he made 76 metres away from the f**king try line you simple f**king fool
Nicho Hynes was further from the try line than Tapine was.
Jesus wept. You are truly a f**king dumb motherf**ker.
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
11,718
They'd have you covered that's for sure

f**king BOLD chat from a guy who said this
Both were in try scoring situations and not similar at all
This f**king guy! Both in try scoring situations as he references two plays further away from the try line than Tapine, one of which (Hess) f**king 70 metres + from the try line against a set defensive line

SEVENTY METRES PLUS! Lord have mercy, and he wants to lecture people on try scoring situations. What a time to be alive.
😆
 

Latest posts

Top