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

[adamkungl]

Broncos were garbage and only won due to bad refereeing. Even with the Titans completing 1 in every 6 sets they still had them covered in the 8 minutes of play that was actually fair game. No chance next week

 

[Nice Beaver]

Can't wait for the Broncos to go on and take out the GF this year the butthurt will be golourious.

I can't wait for them to play next week without Sutton.

 

[God-King Dean]

Can't wait for the Broncos to go on and take out the GF this year the butthurt will be golourious.

Only one who will have butthurt is you after I'm done rooting ya

 

[Caped Crusader]

Mead's intent has no bearing on the call, it's as simple as the contact causing Oates to end up in a dangerous position.

We've seen plenty of contests like this, you seldom see a player end up in Oates' position.

No you don't because the effected player rarely gets as high as Oate's does. He simply did it to himself and if you don't see that you're either incredibly bias or incredibly stupid

 

[umina panther]

Only one who will have butthurt is you after I'm done rooting ya

I'll f**k you till you love me twig

 

[Frederick]

Honestly, I don't know why any of us expected any different performance from the refs.

Suncorp stadium on a Friday night.

Corey Parkers last home game.

It was always on the cards.

As soon as Sutton shook Parkers hands before the game with a massive shit-eating grin on his face, the game was as good as over

 

[Silent Knight]

Can't wait for the Broncos to go on and take out the GF this year the butthurt will be golourious.

Almost as golourious as the Queensland education system.

 

[Miller was a legend]

Almost as golourious as the Queensland education system.

Is that the maths table which goes like this..,

Mums sister had two daughters and three sons
Each had two heads
Mum had 2 sons both had no testicles but one had two dicks and both had two heads.

How many dicks and heads lived at dads house?

Answer: ummm hang on... Dad how many dicks and heads live with your sisters, I mean my mums?

 

[pennywisealfie]

Haha, 'one' game.

Zoli was better too!

Stick to ASAP Rocky, mate!

 

[Marlins]

..

 

[Pedge1971]

I agree it wasn't a tackle.

But it was a collision and Oates ended up in a dangerous position.

Oates put himself in that position. Mead just played at the ball.

 

[Frederick]

 

[no name]

The look on his face is the same as a star struck teen girl meeting their favourite pop star.

 

[TheDMC]

No problem with the penalty try, cannot kick the ball out of someone's hands, its the rule. Shit rule when applied to that situation last night (totally non-dangerous) but still the rule.

Apart from that, it was rotten officiating, made me so angry. Worst I've seen since West Tigers got every decision against the Warriors in 2011 finals (but still lost).

The NRL is the NRL's worst enemy.

 

[Game_Breaker]

How can Mead contest the ball when Oates is 83 meters above him? Lol.

Just because Oates thinks he's in the NBA slam dunk contest doesn't exclude others from contesting the ball

 

[Frederick]

No problem with the penalty try, cannot kick the ball out of someone's hands, its the rule. Shit rule when applied to that situation last night (totally non-dangerous) but still the rule.

What I don't understand is that they changed the rule to say you're allowed to strip the ball with two or more in the tackle in a scoring situation, didn't they? So why can't you dislodge with your feet in a scoring situation?

 

[T-Boon]

What I don't understand is that they changed the rule to say you're allowed to strip the ball with two or more in the tackle in a scoring situation, didn't they? So why can't you dislodge with your feet in a scoring situation?

the rule should be you cannot lead with your foot (Slater style) or otherwise contact the player with your foot in a dangerous way. He kicked out, but it was just so as to get his leg in a position to get under the ball.

 

[Snappy]

the rule should be you cannot lead with your foot (Slater style) or otherwise contact the player with your foot in a dangerous way. He kicked out, but it was just so as to get his leg in a position to get under the ball.

wft ?

OK to kick out to get leg under the ball, but not ok to lead with the foot to get leg under the ball ?

 

[TheDMC]

What I don't understand is that they changed the rule to say you're allowed to strip the ball with two or more in the tackle in a scoring situation, didn't they? So why can't you dislodge with your feet in a scoring situation?

Using your feet is often dangerous in many situations (ala slater), two players stripping the ball isn't.

With using your feet, I guess they made a somewhat black and white rule really, use your feet and its a penalty, no matter dangerous or not. Kinda makes sense else judging whether it is dangerous or not opens up a massive arbitrary can of worms. Somewhat like the shoulder charge ban.

 

[TheDMC]

the rule should be you cannot lead with your foot (Slater style) or otherwise contact the player with your foot in a dangerous way. He kicked out, but it was just so as to get his leg in a position to get under the ball.

Nah, kicking out could be just as dangerous as leading with your feet, depending on where the attackers head is in relation to the ball etc. And trying to judge 'dangerous' opens up cans of worms, the refs, to most of our frustration, struggle to apply rules consistently in the NRL anyway, so I'm all for white and black rules like this one.

I'll happily take an incredibly rare amazing and non-dangerous effort like Hurrell's penalized as opposed to a dozen horrible interpretations of 'dangerous' foot use in an NRL season.