I see we have a new rule now

[God-King Dean]

That's a terrible attitude, & pretty much sums up Harrigan.

Suspend Ryles for 6 weeks.

 

[Frederick]

They don't have it in for us in the sense that they sit around saying "we need to make the roosters lose today boys".

What they do have - and Bill Harrigan admitted to this after the roosters manly game in 2013 when Hargraves was sent off - is top sheets and preconceived, coached perceptions of various players and teams.

Harrigan stated that refs go into games with the idea that X player is dirty in the ruck, or Y player strips the ball, or Z side holds down a lot. They then look for these things to try and stop them doing it. He even said that he and other refs take it personally when they watch a tape and see a marked player get away with something, as though the player got one over on THEM. To avoid this, he stated that known offenders are watched, and if that player is in a ruck and the ball comes out, they make an educated decision that it was likely helped out and will penalise.

Sterling was in the box at the time and was beside himself. First, he said that no player is competing against the ref, and it was only ego that would make a ref think a player was even thinking about getting anything over on them. He then took Harrigan to task that refs can't go into games with perceived notions, as that breeds bias. They should just penalise what they see and that's it. Harrigan scoffed at that suggestion.

That's what is ultimately wrong with refereeing. It's not a conspiracy, it's not with any malice, it's simply a terrible system.

The roosters simply have a few players on their tip sheets, and I would also say they given the huge amount of penalties we get hit with every year for the past decade or so also have a bit of a rep with refs in general for offside and holding down.

Well then isn't it up to the Roosters players to NOT do the things they're constantly being penalized for?

It's not rocket science. If you don't want to be penalized, don't give them a reason to penalize you.

 

[Danish]

That's all well and good, but when refs are coaches to penalised on suspicion, the system is broken. Teams with so-called known offenders will get caned, while teams with cleanskins will get away with things... They then look at the stats, see that X Team is still getting penalised a lot (shock horror) and the cycle goes around again.

Seriously, I understand some of our players (Frank Paul and Hargraves particularly) are penalty merchants, but they both average less than a penalty per game each. That doesn't account for a decade of losing over 70-80% of penalty counts.

I'll see if I can dig up the podcast of that interview on Triple M. It was mindboggling.

 

[Danish]

Found the link in an old post. Listen to the podcast from the 12:20, 26:45, and finally the 35:10 marks:

http://austereo.castmetrix.net/podc...ndayNightFootballRound9SeaEaglesVRoosters.mp3

 

[Apey]

Yeah I was going to say I remember someone posted the audio. Simply amazing.

 

[Perth Red]

That's all well and good, but when refs are coaches to penalised on suspicion, the system is broken. Teams with so-called known offenders will get caned, while teams with cleanskins will get away with things... They then look at the stats, see that X Team is still getting penalised a lot (shock horror) and the cycle goes around again.

Seriously, I understand some of our players (Frank Paul and Hargraves particularly) are penalty merchants, but they both average less than a penalty per game each. That doesn't account for a decade of losing over 70-80% of penalty counts.

I'll see if I can dig up the podcast of that interview on Triple M. It was mindboggling.

If your a repeat offender then you can hardly complain if refs are keeping an eye out for it happening.

In SL refs march players 10m regularly for mouthing off, you never see it in NRL. Time for refs to stop being matey, stop being coaches and take control.

 

[sretsoor]

If your a repeat offender then you can hardly complain if refs are keeping an eye out for it happening.

In SL refs march players 10m regularly for mouthing off, you never see it in NRL. Time for refs to stop being matey, stop being coaches and take control.

Yes but that's the point. You become a regular offender whether you have done it or not because you are penalised on suspicion due to the tip sheets so you have no chance to clear your name.

 

[Mr Spock!]

Abusing and constantly questioning refs sets a worse example than throwing the odd punch.

Why do soccer players chase the refs after a goal? It's not like they'll change their mind.

F**k I hate that.

 

[innsaneink]

If the OP wasn't being such a whinging bitch about it I would actually like to hear people's opinions on whether or not simply using a curse word while talking to the ref should be a sin bin.

I think it should, however we all know that it never is. thurston in particular swears like a sailor at refs every game and never gets pinged. Ennis was swearing at a ref constantly a few weeks back and got nothing as well.

Odd that Badger picked last night to suddenly become offended by the F word

He has little man syndrome
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcwwSs68SSA

 

[Meth]

Assuming the gist of what JWH said was "you can't give that. that's a f**king forward pass".

Would he have been binned if he said ""you can't give that. that's a forward pass"? If so, that's a troubling precedent.

Or was he binned for saying "f**k". If so, that's a troubling precedent

 

[oldmancraigy]

Do you Rooster fans seriously believe the refs have it in for them?

I don't say that flippantly, it's a genius question.

It's not that clever a question...

 

[Meth]

I'll be honest (and I hate the Roosters). I think they get penalised where other teams do not.

 

[Alderley Rooster]

Lol at people abusing me on an Internet forum. Keyboard heros crack me up including you Danish.

The responses on this thread highlight exactly what I was trying to. That yes players should be sent to the bin for dissent like that but you can't just pull it out one week and then leave it. As one poster said Ennis swore three times at a ref once and got nothing.

It is pretty clear JWH is a target for refs and the nrl. Even his suspensions are viewed differently than others. This shouldn't be the case at all everyone should be on an even playing field.

Oh keep up with the whinging bitch comments they are hilarious :roll:

 

[Jason Maher]

You should have had a player sent for a blatant professional foul. Swings and round abouts. Now get over it, you lost.

 

[carcharias]

I thought he must have called the ref a cheat.
Badgers reaction was fairly extreme.
Had Hargreaves been warned during the game ?

 

[TheDalek079]

You should have had a player sent for a blatant professional foul. Swings and round abouts. Now get over it, you lost.

the play the ball was 15 metres out. SBW made the tackle close to the line. So he got back the 10 metres.

 

[TheFrog]

Binning for backchat is discretionary and there are all sorts of variables involved. When you address the ref in a contrary way, you ride your luck. Sometimes you win. Sometimes you lose.

I do think a big part of the binning was that it was JWH though

Probably dead right, and I don't blame the refs, if this is how the bloke behaves.

You get sent to the bin and don't go, it should be off for the match and front the judiciary on Wednesday night.

 

[Jack_Napier]

You should have had a player sent for a blatant professional foul. Swings and round abouts. Now get over it, you lost.

Why has everyone completely ignored he fact the refs ruled a forward pass from Newcastle occurred before Sonny made the tackle, so we got penalised for being inside the 10 as the first infringement. Therefore Sonny wasn't sent to the bin.

 

[otori]

I thought he must have called the ref a cheat.
Badgers reaction was fairly extreme.
Had Hargreaves been warned during the game ?

I think Badger had lost his but earlier in the game at James Maloney and told Mini that their players were not to address him and especially not in a disrespectful manner. Not sure what JWH said but it looked pretty vicious to me and he's just generally a pretty intimidating guy.

But this thread is pretty bad. Do Roosters fans honestly believe the refs think theyre a dirty side and they get pinged more often because of that or are they well aware it's better to give a penalty to stop momentum than let in a try.

Plus JWH is just plain dirty. It's not an NRL conspiracy. He pulled his boot along an 18yo debutants face for lulz.

 

[Noname36]

I feel sorry for the good Roosters supporters on here. What a bunch of whinging c**ks a lot of them are.