Joey swears officials got it all wrong -SMH

[Stranger]

I'm not sure if you're reading the question. But I'll take that as a 'yes'.
That is you believe that Andrew Johns is entitled to abuse match officials.
I can't agree.

Nor can I agree with your other comment that players abuse each, so therefore they match officials should be abused too.
Referees are not allowed to call players 'f**king c**ts'.

Read what i said, i said the Captains, and is Joey the captain?

Put it this way, a ref blows the potential chance for the dragons to make the top 8 or top 4, and he is immune from abuse because he is an official.
How does that make sense?

Ref's have no need to abuse players, they aren't costing the ref a chance at a grandfinal or as such. If the ref makes the right call, everybody is happy, but the fact that they arent making the right call, and this is supposed to be satisfactory?

 

[Inferno]

Why are people confusing the issues of swearing on the field and abusing the officials. They are 2 different matters. I don't have a problem with swearing on the field but abusing the referees crosses the line IMO.

 

[salivor]

What has the refs microphone got anything to do with it? Johns wasn't caught making his comment on the refs microphone, it was Checcin reporting his comments that has brought this issue to attention. It's nothing but a clever ploy by Knights fans to try and divert attention away from the real issue.

 

[Iafeta]

Their decisions are final, but shouldn't they face up to the consequences of a bad call?

The Ref's dont treat the players with respect most of the time, why should they be forced to treat the refs with respect?

They do.

A poor call or poor performance is reviewed weekly and if deemed performance was insufficient the referee goes to premier league.

Much the same way as if a player's performance is poor, he is dropped to premier league.

The referees from what I see DO treat the player's with respect. They never go out and say "hey f'n c" or "hey f'n merkin", or blow up and yell out of control to a player. Have you seen first grade referees call players f'n c's? Perhaps you've seen something I haven't.

At the end of the day the referee's decisions are final. Swearing at them will not change their decision. Suspension under contrary conduct for A. Johns. I can't even believe it's being disputed, although in fairness, its not by any forum member not associated with Newcastle.

 

[Stranger]

What has the refs microphone got anything to do with it? Johns wasn't caught making his comment on the refs microphone, it was Checcin reporting his comments that has brought this issue to attention. It's nothing but a clever ploy by Knights fans to try and divert attention away from the real issue.

If thats the case, focusing on the knights blowing up is a clever way to take the blame off the officials once again for making a mistake.:sarcasm:

 

[Iafeta]

Read what i said, i said the Captains, and is Joey the captain?

Put it this way, a ref blows the potential chance for the dragons to make the top 8 or top 4, and he is immune from abuse because he is an official.
How does that make sense?

Ref's have no need to abuse players, they aren't costing the ref a chance at a grandfinal or as such. If the ref makes the right call, everybody is happy, but the fact that they arent making the right call, and this is supposed to be satisfactory?

I think you have an altogether unrealistic view on things. Do you expect referee's to make 100% correct calls?

Fair dinkum. For the record, players certainly don't make 100% correct decisions or correct plays. The Newcastle players should have a good look in the mirror, rather than use the referee's performance as an excuse.

 

[Willow]

Read what i said, i said the Captains, and is Joey the captain?

Read what I said. I asked: Do you think Andrew Johns is entitled to abuse match officials?
A simple yes or no would have done. So I'm taking it that you said yes.
You think Johns is entitled to abuse referees.
I said I can't agree. Referees don't abuse players or swear at them, regardless of how much pressure they find themselves under.
If an NRL referee called a player a 'f**king merkin', I would expect him to be punished. I'd be calling for him to be dropped to a Group 6 match.

Put it this way, a ref blows the potential chance for the dragons to make the top 8 or top 4, and he is immune from abuse because he is an official.
How does that make sense?

If The Dragons captain called the referee a 'f**king merkin', I would expect him to be punished. Marched 10 metres at least. An apology after the match would be mandatory in my opinion.
If the Dragons coach endorsed such abuse in saying the club captain is entitled to call the referee a 'f**king merkin', I would expect him to be punished. A fine of 10K-15K would do. Contrary conduct, bringing the game into disrepute... call it whatever you like.

To further expand on the answer to your question, I agreed with the referee sin binning Jason Ryles for dissent a few weeks back, and I agreed with the NRL when they fined Nathan Brown for having goes at the referees in the media.

Ref's have no need to abuse players, they aren't costing the ref a chance at a grandfinal or as such.

I'm sure if Steve Clark abused a player, and called him a 'f**king merkin', he wouldnt get the grand final match. He might even get sacked altogether. If he turned into a repeat offender, he would definitely be out of a job.

If the ref makes the right call, everybody is happy,

lol. Not always. Even when the refs get it right there are still people having a whinge.

but the fact that they arent making the right call, and this is supposed to be satisfactory?

No, offcourse the referees should be answerable. There are correct procedures for this. I think you'll find that calling match officials 'f**king c**ts' is not part of any correct procedure.

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

Johns is the biggest sook in the game ...& once again the footy show clowns will try to defend him & will be laughed at by the majority of league fans .....much the same as they will get a laugh out of knights fans trying to defend him here..

 

[Medievalknight]

A poor call or poor performance is reviewed weekly and if deemed performance was insufficient the referee goes to premier league.

Do you HONESTLY think Simpkins should go to PREMIER league.....I do, and its not because of ONE performance by Simpkins, He also stuffed up in the video refs chair today at the Raiders -Tiggies game.......TWO stuffups in ONE weekend

= Premier league for me

 

[Bicey_18]

Was listening to the radio this arvo and basically they were saying that more than likely Johns will cop a fine for his words and wont be suspended

 

[salivor]

If thats the case, focusing on the knights blowing up is a clever way to take the blame off the officials once again for making a mistake.:sarcasm:

I didn't know you were such a crusader, it's funny because you didn't seem too concerned about a piss poor refs decision when the boot was on the other foot:

I thought it was fine. Scrum to the knights joey feeds, hits the ref. Go back and do it again... no advantaged was gained either way.

Taken from this thread: http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=149112&page=3 regarding the Sharks v Knights match.

 

[Stranger]

They do.
A poor call or poor performance is reviewed weekly and if deemed performance was insufficient the referee goes to premier league.
Much the same way as if a player's performance is poor, he is dropped to premier league.
The referees from what I see DO treat the player's with respect. They never go out and say "hey f'n c" or "hey f'n merkin", or blow up and yell out of control to a player. Have you seen first grade referees call players f'n c's? Perhaps you've seen something I haven't.
At the end of the day the referee's decisions are final. Swearing at them will not change their decision. Suspension under contrary conduct for A. Johns. I can't even believe it's being disputed, although in fairness, its not by any forum member not associated with Newcastle.

Ref's don't treat players with respect, they don't listen to them because they are told not to. A ref isn't even supposed to tell a Captain what a penalty is for, and to be clear, most of them don't, some of them wont even speak to a captain, they just tell them to move on. I mean, they want a game that they are respected upon, yet they are unable to accept the blame.

The match review committee is not there for Ref's accepting the blame for a bad call, they sit down and talk about the game's , but that doesn't change anything, its helping to clarify rules, like obstruction. They make a mistake that the match review committee picks up, and nothing changes, its a case of 'ohh ill do better next time', but its obvious that they aren't improving, only a fool would say they are.

I think you have an altogether unrealistic view on things. Do you expect referee's to make 100% correct calls?

You see players accepting the responsibly for cost a team by missing a conversion or something like that, why can't Ref's? Players and Ref's make mistakes, but ref's seem to be immune from criticism from anybody that matters in the game such as players and coaches.

In no way am i condoning the way that Johns did what he did, but i feel as though the touchie and ref should have been criticized by the captain.

To further expand on the answer to your question, I agreed with the referee sin binning Jason Ryles for dissent a few weeks back, and I agreed with the NRL when they fined Nathan Brown for having goes at the referees in the media.

I don't agree with them fining Brown, if he believes they were mis-treated he should have the right to say so. Ryles should have gone to the bin, as should have Bedsey and Carney if they said anything along the lines of what Joey said, but in the heat of the game, its going to happen, and that should be understood by match officials.
Why are the officials a protected species?

 

[Stranger]

I didn't know you were such a crusader, it's funny because you didn't seem too concerned about a piss poor refs decision when the boot was on the other foot:

Taken from this thread: http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=149112&page=3 regarding the Sharks v Knights match.

There is a difference between logic and a poor decision. How you can even compare the two is beyond me.

 

[Iafeta]

Do you HONESTLY think Simpkins should go to PREMIER league.....I do, and its not because of ONE performance by Simpkins, He also stuffed up in the video refs chair today at the Raiders -Tiggies game.......TWO stuffups in ONE weekend

= Premier league for me

I have no opinion on it.

I do know though that this year several referees have done time in premier league after abject failures. If his performance is deemed is such, yes, he'll be in premier league.

 

[salivor]

Let's see, Hayne gets a black and white rule wrong. Under the rules of the game the Sharks had territorial advantage so therefore were the attacking team and should've got the feed to the scrum and one last set to attack Newcastle. End of story.

Simpkins makes a call based on interpretation on whether or not Matai deliberately played at the ball therefore knocked on or whether or not it was an accidental deflection in the process of making a tackle. While we've come to a consensus that the incorrect call was made, it was still a call based on interpretation and not nearly as black and white as the Hayne decision.

So in one case Knights fans put their backing in behind Hayne while on the other they want to scream from the rooftops "we was robbed" and want to back their captain to the hilt for abusing match officials. Knights fans are amusing if nothing else.

 

[Iafeta]

Ref's don't treat players with respect, they don't listen to them because they are told not to. A ref isn't even supposed to tell a Captain what a penalty is for, and to be clear, most of them don't, some of them wont even speak to a captain, they just tell them to move on. I mean, they want a game that they are respected upon, yet they are unable to accept the blame.

I shouldn't even give this respect enough to reply. I should treat it with the Newcastle-eyed contempt it deserves.

However, referees DO respect players.

Do you hear referees go around saying "Hey, f'n merkin" or "Hey f'n c"?

Sorry? You think they do. Oh well that's fair enough then. Let me know what minute in a game and which game I need to watch to see that and I'll happily retract.

Non-captains have NO place going to a referee. That's not disrespect. That's just common sense. You don't want it to be open slather. Surely. Do you? Seriously. Come on, don't tell me you're that deluded.

On most occasions, a referee WILL listen to a captain, but fair dinkum, they also have to know the trend of the game - there are many captains who will discuss a point not because they feel its moot, but because they are trying to buy their team a breath. Furthermore, the referee's decision is final - always has been, and always will be, and if the referee sees no point in discussing the point with the captain, but gives a formal indication of what the penalty is for, that's his prerogative. And that's NOT disrespect. That's just to keep an orderly flow of the game.

 

[CrazyEel]

Knights fans are amusing if nothing else.

:lol: Sums this thread up pretty well

 

[Stranger]

Let's see, Hayne gets a black and white rule wrong. Under the rules of the game the Sharks had territorial advantage so therefore were the attacking team and should've got the feed to the scrum and one last set to attack Newcastle. End of story.

Simpkins makes a call based on interpretation on whether or not Matai deliberately played at the ball therefore knocked on or whether or not it was an accidental deflection in the process of making a tackle. While we've come to a consensus that the incorrect call was made, it was still a call based on interpretation and not nearly as black and white as the Hayne decision.

Both mistakes, however one resulted in common sense.

So in one case Knights fans put their backing in behind Hayne while on the other they want to scream from the rooftops "we was robbed" and want to back their captain to the hilt for abusing match officials. Knights fans are amusing if nothing else.

You claim we are bias, which may be so, but you are just as bias when looking at matters involving Newcastle, the only difference being you are against.

Non-captains have NO place going to a referee. That's not disrespect. That's just common sense. You don't want it to be open slather. Surely. Do you? Seriously. Come on, don't tell me you're that deluded.

Agreed, like i said Bin Bedsey or Carney for going to the officials.

A referee will not listen to a captain, the ref will tell him exactly what he wants, and send him a way.

 

[salivor]

Both mistakes, however one resulted in common sense.

No, the incorrect call was made, simple as that, Cronulla exactly like Newcastle on Friday night were robbed of a chance to have one more set to attack the opposition. You only had a problem with one call though so it's a bit rich to make yourself out to be a campaigner against poor refereeing.

Many people don't like the stripping rule either so if referees start ignoring it when opposition teams who deliberatly strip the ball from Newcastle players in two or more man tackles will that be common sense prevailing? If it's in the rule book then the referee has to follow it, whether you agree with it or not, if the shoe was on the other foot Newcastle fans would've been doing their usual we was robbed routine.

You claim we are bias, which may be so, but you are just as bias when looking at matters involving Newcastle, the only difference being you are against.

Rubbish, I actually defended Andrew Johns on the previous swearing controversy.

 

[Jobdog]

If The Dragons captain called the referee a 'f**king merkin', I would expect him to be punished. Marched 10 metres at least. An apology after the match would be mandatory in my opinion.
If the Dragons coach endorsed such abuse in saying the club captain is entitled to call the referee a 'f**king merkin', I would expect him to be punished. A fine of 10K-15K would do. Contrary conduct, bringing the game into disrepute... call it whatever you like.

So by saying that, you're also saying that abusing referees is totally acceptable. And you wouldn't think that your captain should be suspended for abusing an official. Whats the difference between Andrew Johns saying it and Trent Barrett saying it? Its because its Andrew Johns that you want him suspended