Is that the most one-sided refereeing performance you've seen this year?

[Shorty]

I think the captain challenge (or coaches challenge) would fix most of the issues from last night.

Nope, just a glorified bunker....they'll find reasons to disallow and then the captain loses the ability to challenge.

Face it, it is what it is...Broncos will always get the contentious calls in the finals.

 

[Big Pete]

I was annoyed when the Bunker randomly jumped in to overturn a scrum awarded to the Titans. They just seem to do it (and not do it) on a whim.

Plus, it slows the game down as players are waiting, hoping for the Bunker to overturn a decision.

They didn't 'randomly' intervene, Sutton referred the incident, which he's allowed to do when there is a break in play.

Kahu knocked the ball backwards and in an attempt to get to the loose ball, Pulu knocks it into Kahu.

 

[Nice Beaver]

A ref saying he didn't see a tackled player kicking a defender is an admission of incompetence.

Not to mention there is another ref out there also, did he "not see it" also?

The whole idea of two refs is one to police the ruck and the other the 10 meters, is it not?

So the refs either were not watching and hence not doing the basic job they are paid for, or flat out lying.

I take option 2.

 

[POPEYE]

Whilst we're passing time stirring the pot what are the chances Cecchin will keep control over Shortall . . . this game might have a good chance of being a fair contest

Cummins/Atkins are in charge of the Who The F**k Cares game and Nose & Gnome will have Turdy on the edge of his seat

I'm going out to buy popcorn

 

[Big Pete]

and here's another one.

You obviously don't know the game very well if you really think most of those calls were correct. You guys are in the minority on this, you look anywhere and everywhere in the rugby league world and they'll all say the same thing, the officiating was rubbish but of course you're too blind to see it.

Are we really in the minority?

A lot of the arguments I've heard and read seem to be prefaced by 'Technically it's correct, I just don't like it.'

Which is fine, personally I don't like it how players can infringe and escape without penalty just as long as the opposition scores. There were two incidents like that last night, but technically the referee had his hands tied.

What a load of horsesh*t, Pete. It was the wrong call.

Would Oates have ended up in a dangerous position if it wasn't for Mead's presence, yes or no?

 

[redvscotty]

It's not that I don't agree, it's obvious there was some very dodgy calls. It's just the level of outrage that I can't understand. We've seen worse games called in origin.

LU is pretty notorious for it's disdain for anything Broncos. So I really shouldn't be surprised that the one game where we finally get things go our way, everyone is up in arms.

Haha, 'one' game.

Zoli was better too!

 

[TooheysNew]

Would Oates have ended up in a dangerous position if it wasn't for Mead's presence, yes or no?

By that logic Oates should be penalised as well. If Oates wasn't there Oates doesn't wind up in a dangerous position either.

 

[VictorTheViking]

By that logic Oates should be penalised as well. If Oates wasn't there Oates doesn't wind up in a dangerous position either.

It was a contest for the ball that you see every week, I fail to see why that was automatically a broncos penalty dangerous position or not, its not penalised during regular round games, why is it at suncorp?

 

[Big Pete]

By that logic Oates should be penalised as well. If Oates wasn't there Oates doesn't wind up in a dangerous position either.

Put it this way, how many times have we seen players penalised for a head high when the opposition player was falling into the tackle?

The intention may have been perfectly fine, but the end result was poor.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

There were some contentious decisions but the oates penalty was ridiculously wrong. Any bronco fan who argues otherwise is beyond help.

 

[carcharias]

Somebody should of dropped that ref on his head...and then kicked him in the back while he lay on the ground.

 

[Edwahu]

Yep, the Oates call was the outright worst call I have seen this year.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Somebody should of dropped that ref on his head...and then kicked him in the back while he lay on the ground.

FKL?

 

[Big Pete]

It was a contest for the ball that you see every week, I fail to see why that was automatically a broncos penalty dangerous position or not, its not penalised during regular round games, why is it at suncorp?

Can you think of another instance when a player has been placed in a dangerous position after a mid-air collision and it was ignored?

The officials are very sensitive in that department because the risk of injury is high.

 

[big hit!]

Archer spoke to media after game and defended the refereeing performance, saying Bunker staff had no jurisdiction over the Roberts kicking incident because they could only review as far back as the play-the-ball.

If Roberts had kicked Simpkins after he played the ball, it would have been fair game for the video review but because he lashed out beforehand it was destined to be left up to the review panel.

"The Bunker determined a try, which was after the play-the-ball period. The check on the try starts at the point of the play the ball, otherwise you could go all the way back through a set," Archer said

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rug...f-gold-coast-titans-loss-20160909-grd8f5.html

With the greatest respect f**k right off

still doesn't explain how the pocket referee missed it when it happened. isn't his job to keep his eye on the ruck while the lead ref looks after the defensive line? and then you've got the two flag waivers on the sideline who do sweet f**k all. f**k me, how did 40000 at the ground, the commentators, and another million households on tele see it as it happened, but the multiple f**kers who actually had the authority to make the decision all miss it?

 

[TooheysNew]

Put it this way, how many times have we seen players penalised for a head high when the opposition player was falling into the tackle?

The intention may have been perfectly fine, but the end result was poor.

Terrible analogy. A better analogy would be a player grabbing the tacklers arm and wrapping it around his own neck.

 

[big hit!]

Nope, just a glorified bunker....they'll find reasons to disallow and then the captain loses the ability to challenge.

probably. one of the major issues has been the interpretation of the rules by the bunker.

 

[carcharias]

Can you think of another instance when a player has been placed in a dangerous position after a mid-air collision and it was ignored?

The officials are very sensitive in that department because the risk of injury is high.

Horseshit

They both went for the ball
It wasn't a tackle

 

[chigurh]

Union is a boring and terrible game but I think they do a better job of protecting players in the air from dangerous contact and had he been playing Union, I think Mead may have found himself in the bin following that reckless collision.

 

[Big Pete]

Terrible analogy. A better analogy would be a player grabbing the tacklers arm and wrapping it around his own neck.

Because Oates deliberately placed himself in that position?

Try again.