Jarred Maxwell......

[Delboy]

Boxie, watch the replay, Tthe dope has his hand in the air signalling still 5th. Hindy on radio today said he yelled at Burt that there was no repeat set

By the way, it's not rubbish, and I may know a little more than you think, still you are entitled to yur opinion, I was pointing out that anexperienced player like Luke surprisingly did not look athe ref, which ultimately cost us the game

 

[strider]

i recognize that under the current rules it is NOT 6 again and burty f'ed up last night .... but I think they need to change the rules - if you run at a guy who is clearly attempting a kick and then turn your back and let it hit you then IMO you are making a play at the kick ..... you are putting yourself in a position where the ball will likely hit you - i don't give a f**k if you didn't put your arms up

 

[Suitman]

i recognize that under the current rules it is NOT 6 again and burty f'ed up last night .... but I think they need to change the rules - if you run at a guy who is clearly attempting a kick and then turn your back and let it hit you then IMO you are making a play at the kick ..... you are putting yourself in a position where the ball will likely hit you - i don't give a f**k if you didn't put your arms up

True that. Obviously putting yourself in a position to block the ball = playing at the ball.

Suity

 

[El Diablo]

Burt didn't f**k up

Maxwell changed the rules and stopped the clock

a game could take 30 minutes longer if that happened every set

 

[strider]

Burt didn't f**k up

Maxwell changed the rules and stopped the clock

a game could take 30 minutes longer if that happened every set

well you could also argue that Burt could have been penalised for not handing the ball over immediately as the rules state he must .... there were 10 sec left when he got tackled - he was clearly looking to stall

 

[El Diablo]

well you could also argue that Burt could have been penalised for not handing the ball over immediately as the rules state he must .... there were 10 sec left when he got tackled - he was clearly looking to stall

he thought it was the first and the ref stopped the clock when he was still in the process of being tackled

 

[strider]

he thought it was the first and the ref stopped the clock when he was still in the process of being tackled

no he didn't actually - there were 10 sec left when he was tackled and only 1 or 2 when he called time out

if it was them who had the ball we would have been pissed off if they hadn't handed it over quick smart

 

[Suitman]

well you could also argue that Burt could have been penalised for not handing the ball over immediately as the rules state he must .... there were 10 sec left when he got tackled - he was clearly looking to stall

That's the point though Strides.
If Burt had done what he did in the 20th ninute, it would have taken 10 or so seconds without conjecture from the referee. Why is it any different in the 80th minute? Maxwell clearly over-reacted in this case. It was incompetent.
I asked myself this morning whether if this had happened to the Bulldogs or the Storm for example (my most hated clubs), would I still feel the same way about the decision?
f**king oath I would. It was reactionary without precedence. Appalling.

Suity

 

[IFR33K]

i recognize that under the current rules it is NOT 6 again and burty f'ed up last night .... but I think they need to change the rules - if you run at a guy who is clearly attempting a kick and then turn your back and let it hit you then IMO you are making a play at the kick ..... you are putting yourself in a position where the ball will likely hit you - i don't give a f**k if you didn't put your arms up

There have been plenty of these calls go that way. The panthers player goal was to cleary block the kick. Common sense would say 6 again, and I don't think it's Burt fault, but he should of looked out for the refs decision.

The 6 again rule that does my head in, is where a player goes in for the tackle, and the ball is passed into his hand as he is making the tackle.

If that is deemed 6 again week in week out, then surely last night it should of been 6 again.

 

[strider]

That's the point though Strides.
If Burt had done what he did in the 20th ninute, it would have taken 10 or so seconds without conjecture from the referee. Why is it any different in the 80th minute? Maxwell clearly over-reacted in this case. It was incompetent.
I asked myself this morning whether if this had happened to the Bulldogs or the Storm for example (my most hated clubs), would I still feel the same way about the decision?
f**king oath I would. It was reactionary without precedence. Appalling.

Suity

well yeah i agree it would be totally different at some other time of the game - but thats how games are - we'd also look to play the ball a million times quicker all game but at he death slow it down if we're in front - its just how things are ..... and just like our 2nd shot at field goal in extra time - petro was standing miles to the side of marker and got a massive head start at the kicker - but the refs do things different at the death of games - i think its just natural human behaviour tbh

 

[Suitman]

The 6 again rule that does my head in, is where a player goes in for the tackle, and the ball is passed into his hand as he is making the tackle.

If that is deemed 6 again week in week out, then surely last night it should of been 6 again.

Strangely enough, I couldn't agree more. That hand rule that you speak of is a shocker. I've always been confused as to why it was changed.
Now that we've agreed, if we ever meet, you can buy your own f**king beer. :lol:

Suity

 

[strider]

There have been plenty of these calls go that way. The panthers player goal was to cleary block the kick. Common sense would say 6 again, and I don't think it's Burt fault, but he should of looked out for the refs decision.

The 6 again rule that does my head in, is where a player goes in for the tackle, and the ball is passed into his hand as he is making the tackle.

If that is deemed 6 again week in week out, then surely last night it should of been 6 again.

well alot of players DO take a big swing with the arms going into such tackles to "accidently" knock the pass ;-) .... so i'm happy to let that go too

i actually suspect Burt had an idea it wasn't 6 again but just thought time was up anyway and thought he just needed to get tackled and not lose the ball

 

[spiderdan]

It seems like the rule to be pedantic about for now slowing down the play in the dying few moments of games. I think it was Friday night (maybe last week?) I am sure there was a game where the side leading was slowing down the play in the last couple of minutes and the ref told them to hurry up and play the ball otherwise they'd be penalized. This is the thing that irks me about refs. I can cop that they are human and make mistakes but I don't get why they get anal about one rule for a week or two (being in front of the kicker marginally, slightly over stepping the mark when kicking for touch from a penalty, etc) then they forget about it and police some other minor rule.

Would be good to just get consistent application for the duration of a season.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I think far too many aspects of the game come down to ref's judgement.

Unfortunately, any fix would make the game too much like American Football.

 

[Parra Pride]

well alot of players DO take a big swing with the arms going into such tackles to "accidently" knock the pass ;-) .... so i'm happy to let that go too

i actually suspect Burt had an idea it wasn't 6 again but just thought time was up anyway and thought he just needed to get tackled and not lose the ball

Can he really be blamed for that? Where I was sitting everyone around me thought the game was over, took a while for people to click that the dick head called time off.

 

[Tony Bongo]

Can he really be blamed for that? Where I was sitting everyone around me thought the game was over, took a while for people to click that the dick head called time off.

Well the dickhead actually called time off 3 times in the last 67 seconds. :crazy:

 

[Gronk]

Eels want answer on ref's costly call

• Stuart Honeysett
• From: The Australian
• July 18, 2011 12:00AM

IT was a horrible way to spoil the party and Nathan Hindmarsh and Parramatta want an answer.

The Eels were still seething yesterday over the controversial golden-point loss in Saturday night's derby against Penrith at Centrebet Stadium which soured the celebrations for Hindmarsh's 300th first grade game.
With only a second to go in regulation time, the Eels were caught in possession on the last tackle through Luke Burt after he regathered a kick that had come off a Penrith player but wasn't ruled a chargedown. Referee Jared Maxwell stopped the clock and ordered a changeover.
The Panthers scored a miracle try to send the match into extra time and Panthers halfback Luke Walsh landed a field goal to steal an unlikely win and deny Hindmarsh a fitting finish.
"It baffled me a bit that one," Hindmarsh told ABC Radio yesterday.
"I've been involved in enough games and I've never seen a time out for a changeover.
"I don't think 'Burty' had even got to his feet before he'd blown time out.
"It was a weird one."
Eels chief executive Paul Osborne said he was looking forward to an explanation from referees' coach Bill Harrigan today as to why Maxwell stopped the match.
"I'd be interested to hear their take but what's done is done," Osborne said.
"I don't believe individual decisions end up costing teams finals spots but I look forward to Bill's take on this one."
Harrigan said yesterday he wanted to review the match today before stating publicly whether his men had got it right.
"The referee has ruled that it wasn't a chargedown and that's why he said it was play on (for Burt) and then he obviously stops the clock for a changeover and then we see what unfolds," Harrigan said.
"After (today) when I've done the debrief that's when I can make further comment on it.
"I've watched it but I've put a policy in place for all my coaches and all my referees that we don't talk about particular incidents in a game until we've debriefed it because we've been burnt before."
Hindmarsh accepted the game ball from NRL chief executive David Gallop after the match and admitted he would at least always remember his milestone match.
"What's done is done and we've just got to get on with it," Hindmarsh said.
"Don't get me wrong. I was filthy at the end of the match and it's the worst way to get beat -- a second left on the clock and you've got the game in the bag."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...refs-costly-call/story-e6frg7mf-1226096412445

 

[Twizzle]

I think we all want answers

 

[Parra Pride]

I don't want answers, I want 2 points.

 

[Gronk]

I don't want answers, I want 2 points.

If it worked like that we'd have a 2009 grand final win.