Hasler's comments on the ref

[themacemaceman]

Any thoughts about Dessie's comments in regards to the refs after the knights game. I don't think comments like that by coaches are good for the game. The $10000 fine for coaches bagging refs is a joke. I don't think it deters anyone. They should make it $100000.

 

[Perth Red]

What did he say?

 

[M2D2]

He brought to light that the refs kept on saying "the game is changing" and took it as the refs went with a per-conceived notion that they were the ones that were leading the game to change.
Personally if i heard the refs saying "the game is changing" i would be rather annoyed they are doing a commentary on the f**king game rather than doing their job.

 

[Joely01]

I'm glad he has, if the refs have actually said "the game is changing" im pi**ed just as a league support, refs should ref to the game not what they think will happen.

 

[some11]

I'd cough up 10k just to smack Brett Suttor in the face.

 

[skeepe]

I'm with Des.

They were saying "the game will change" before it did, and they awarded some very, very tough penalties against the Bulldogs.

Not saying the two things are connected but still, it makes you wonder...

 

[dogslife]

I'd cough up 10k just to smack Brett Suttor in the face.

This

 

[innsaneink]

I'm with Des.

They were saying "the game will change" before it did, and they awarded some very, very tough penalties against the Bulldogs.

Not saying the two things are connected but still, it makes you wonder...

...and you can bet your bottom dollar the ref wont be brought to account to explain his comments, hasler will be hammered though for his comments...and yes there was a very clear evident shift that seemed to go all Knights way

 

[blacklock]

Any thoughts about Dessie's comments in regards to the refs after the knights game. I don't think comments like that by coaches are good for the game. The $10000 fine for coaches bagging refs is a joke. I don't think it deters anyone. They should make it $100000.

you mean when a ref awards a strip on the LAST TACKLE and the player is wrapped up trying to offload trying to avoid the turnover....then when the captain tries to convey that logic, responds with a smart ass comment "im a ref not a psychologist".

i think those silly calls are worse for a game than a coach highlighting them. toovey on the other hand will complain each and every week be it a good or bad call. so we have to pick our battles.

sometimes a coach has a right to call bullshit, sometimes not.

 

[Angry_eel]

What did bennet say in response?

 

[blacklock]

What did bennet say in response?

he half agreed but said des was just attacking the refs to overshadow or distract attention from his teams good form ie to fly under the radar or keep expectations in check

 

[Chook Norris]

[youtube]BvTNyKIGXiI[/youtube]

"thank you for saying what needed to be said!"

 

[Apey]

he half agreed but said des was just attacking the refs to overshadow or distract attention from his teams good form ie to fly under the radar or keep expectations in check

I think you'd be kidding yourself if you don't think this was at least part of the motivation behind it :lol: Good old Des.

 

[dogslife]

Whatever the motivation some of the refs calls were a little confusing to say the least. Penalising for a strip on the last tackle where a bloke is wrapped up by 3 blokes and is trying everything he can to offload the ball so it doesn't end up a handover, yeah good one! Or telling Adam Cuthbertson he could have been penalised 4 tackles in a row, but not penalising him...

 

[Haffa]

We got a few calls go our way last night. I think he's entitled to complain.

I'd hate to see his reaction if they'd cost him the game though.

 

[Nice Beaver]

Anyone who thinks Dessie wasn't just playing the diversion game is kidding themselves.

Under the radar Dessie...under the radar.

 

[Lambretta]

I thought flying under the radar meant you were generally not being noticed and people generally thought you were going to be an also ran side.

I'd say the Cowboys or the Sea Eagles could possibly be flying under the radar - but when you're top of the league and playing some of the best football in the comp, I'd have to call that "raging hot favourites"

If Des is trying to deflect the news away from the fact his side are red hot they'd do better to lose a few games rather than call the referees a weird mob.

 

[Jobdog]

Des' comments served their purpose. He's successfully shifted the spotlight from his team winning their 10th straight game onto the referees.

He'll probably be hoping he's slapped with a 10k fine because that'll be the news for the first half of this week and then the remaining half will be focussed on previewing next Sunday's game and the win vs the Knights will be forgotten about.

 

[Nice Beaver]

I thought flying under the radar meant you were generally not being noticed and people generally thought you were going to be an also ran side.

I'd say the Cowboys or the Sea Eagles could possibly be flying under the radar - but when you're top of the league and playing some of the best football in the comp, I'd have to call that "raging hot favourites"

If Des is trying to deflect the news away from the fact his side are red hot they'd do better to lose a few games rather than call the referees a weird mob.

The fact they have won 10 in a row and 90% of the articles are about Des' shot at the refs would indicate that he has drawn attention away from the team and shifted it elsewhere.

That to me is getting your team to "fly under the rader"

Of course people know they have won 10 in a row. But what are people talking about? 10 in a row or Dessie's "rant" at the refs??

 

[Lambretta]

I'd cough up 10k just to smack Brett Suttor in the face.

The first time I saw Brett Suttor was a game between the Knights and Roosters at the SFS in 2009 when we got the spoon.

I think the penalty count was 8,000 to nil to the Knights by half time all awarded by Suttor for things like holding down in the ruck, hands on the ball, jumping early in defence etc. None of the penalties were clear cut like head high's or picking up the ball from an offside position etc they were all subjective penalties and they were all directed at the same team by the same referee. This led to the Knights being up by 30 points at half time.

The other referee, Badger started making up imaginary penalties to give to the Roosters because he was so embarrassed by Suttor's performance and wanted to stop the game being a 100 point blow out. I honestly saw us get given 3 or 4 penalties for complete and utter nothings in the second half by Badger and Badger just kept glaring at Suttor to warn him to keep the f**k out of the game.

I have hated Suttor since that day and cannot see any difference in his behaviour.