Look I am a parra fan, need to state that straight up. I don't think we were robbed of victory by that archer call, but I do think it was a very poor call and it deprived us a fair chance of a shot of equalling the game up. That is what is upsetting, that we missed that chance through a pretty dud call.
On the reffing in general, what annoys me is when refs pull a penalty out that has not been ruled all night when the penalty is not blatent. Tonights game was reffed like most big games with few penalties especially in the ruck and only 8 in total One penalty to each side for markers not being square both were blatent, no dramas. 2 strips penalities against the storm both were blatent. Chambers took ball inside 10m, clear penalty. One for blair's high shot on inu, which was soft but was a lazy arm and and very blatent. So that is 6 of the eight penalties none so far for hold downs.
I'll add before I talk about ruck penalties, melbourne could have got a penalty for smith taking inglis out, so they missed out there. So thats one in my view melbourne can feel hard done by.
But 4 moments in the ruck that I think sums up why I personally feel a little hard done by (not saying it cost us the match). 2 were penalties and 2 were not penalties. Like any sad eels fan I watched the the game back and slowed down these incidents, yes its sad.
1. Turner is allowed to play on. That was a poor call, he was clearly on the ground on his stomach with keating around his legs. He then breaks free rises to his feet and I think he was initially looking for a quick play the ball but was given either no call to play it or a play on call. It was a huge call that was wrong. And it was one of those game changers in my view, instead of a quick play the ball on tackle 2 on his own 38m mark, turner gets to the opposition 40m mark. It allowed melb to make their last play kick from about 20m out on tackle five and force hayne in goal. Next set great run hoffman try. The turner run was huge in the context of what happens next.
2. The first of only two hold down penalties, nielsen tackled by ben smith does the classic milk the penalty pretend to rise but fall down. Gets a penalty. It was 50-50, I don't really have problem with the call if it is made consistently throughout the game. It wasn't, in the context of the game and other decisions it was very soft, but once again important. Melbourne got field position and score their 2nd try in that set.
3. A little different but relevant. Hindy loses ball looking for a quickish play the ball, he loses it because the ball is bumped by a storm players knee as he is trying to play it. 50-50 call no real dramas with it being called knock on, except the slater call is next.
4. Eels on rampage mel working out of own half, 5 mins left. Slater gets cut down by great moi moi tackle and loses ball cold trying to rise. Penalty just a bad call. Instead of eels scrum feed 35m out, its storm ball 40m from eels line, they work to play the ball and kick field goal. Makes it massive call.
So the above is my analysis on why as an eels fan I feel a little disgruntled about the way we lost and particularly the final call which deprived us of the chance to have a crack. I think in the context of the match those 3 of those calls above were big ones and lacking in consistency with what happened throughout the 80 minutes, one was just wrong. I didn't think either side was better or worse in terms of ruck hold downs, both sides had some moments when they could have been penalised. Which is clearly when the refs had decided that they were going to just let it go origin style, that they pulled a few soft ones out.
I also disagree that the storm were a much better side, I think they were clinical is taking their chances. But the eels made more line breaks and more metres and despite some poor finishing options looked more likely to make breaks. So I think it was a close game and congrats to the storm for winning, they deserved it. But I just thought we deserved the chance to have another crack when we earned it. Refs need to show consistency because what seems like small calls can have huge effects.
I am sure its been brought up, but maybe its justice for the storm as they had some horrible calls go against them in 2006 which directly cost them points and probably the grand final. calls much worse (well apart from slaters) than today's calls. We might not have won anyway but it would have been nice if was the storm's great defence and not a dud ref call that brought out charge to a halt.
Oh by the way despite my sad eels story above, I actually thought the real turning point was the eels failure to contest that ball. We had all the momentum and a decent bomb and a good chase bring us down through our own fault. If their is one area where slater has it over hayne, its his hustle in defence. Hayne wandered over and neither chose to contest the ball which is okay but then he should have got in position to be right on inglis when he caught it. Compare to when Inu caught that bomb uncontested, but slater was right there when he landed to put a hit on which forced a poor pass from Inu.
So Jarryd just an area to work on, as you let morris get a try through slackness the week before as well. But you are still a superstar.
2010 here we come. I did notice their was a lack of absolute turmoil after the game from the eels, yes they were upset, but not like 2001, I think they know on paper they should only get better in 2010. Lets hope s0 go the eels.
