Beware the return of the Disruptor this weekend

[Warrimoo3]

Annesley flagged the return of the Disruptor during his weekly review after the Disruptor non call in the Cowboys v Bulldogs match . In April this year he actually stated that the referees need to look at the eyes of the chaser ,amongst other indicators, to determine if a player is disrupting a contest. The mind boggles.

I have been watching rugby league since 1970 and the current standard of refereeing is diabolical , without doubt collectively the worst that I’ve ever seen. Prepare for a barrage of penalties over this week’s round for anything that even vaguely resembles a disruptor . BTW , what are these mysterious “other indicators?” NRL fans should be afraid. Very afraid .

 

[Chimp]

Annesley flagged the return of the Disruptor during his weekly review after the Disruptor non call in the Cowboys v Bulldogs match . In April this year he actually stated that the referees need to look at the eyes of the chaser ,amongst other indicators, to determine if a player is disrupting a contest. The mind boggles.

I have been watching rugby league since 1970 and the current standard of refereeing is diabolical , without doubt collectively the worst that I’ve ever seen. Prepare for a barrage of penalties over this week’s round for anything that even vaguely resembles a disruptor . BTW , what are these mysterious “other indicators?” NRL fans should be afraid. Very afraid .

If the season so far is anything to go by, it’ll only be the Sharks that get pinged for it, seems to have been the way so far this year.

 

[Warrimoo3]

When they brought in this stupid rule , chasers were often getting penalised when they mistimed their jump or didn’t come down with the ball even though often they were genuinely looking to regain possession. Overzealous referees keen to meet their KPIs kept ruling a penalty. After about a 2 months of this ridiculous interpretation , chasers stopped contesting kicks (apart from try scoring opportunities) because the risk of a conceding a penalty and losing field position was too high. This was having a detrimental effect on the game as a spectacle and the rule appeared to be unofficially consigned to the scrap heap . Until now.

 

[Chimp]

No

When they brought in this stupid rule , chasers were often getting penalised when they mistimed their jump or didn’t come down with the ball even though often they were genuinely looking to regain possession. Overzealous referees keen to meet their KPIs kept ruling a penalty. After about a 2 months of this ridiculous interpretation , chasers stopped contesting kicks (apart from try scoring opportunities) because the risk of a conceding a penalty and losing field position was too high. This was having a detrimental effect on the game as a spectacle and the rule appeared to be unofficially consigned to the scrap heap . Until now.

Largely unofficially consigned to the scrap heap…. They still found time to ping the Sharks randomly a couple of times