A breach of contract?
http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=346493
05-10-2009, 10:40 PM
http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showpost.php?p=6169999&postcount=17
Re: A breach of contract? If the same rules are applied in the GF as they were over a whole season it doesn't matter if the Eels let in 2 one on one soft tries and one uncontested ball soft try and are well behind the 8 ball chasing points for the first 65 minutes of the game.
They could have played crap as far as I am concerned but what does matter, is the Eels performing on a level playing field of fairness that would have given them the possible (but more than likely) opportunity of mounting a sustained attack which could have led to tries in the last 15 minutes, yet alone at any given point of time during the game.
At any time the pendulum can swing either way and we have all seen this natural occurrence in most NRL games going back at least ten years.
Getting penalties for deliberate slowing down of the ball could have assisted The Eels in scoring 3 tries in the last ten minutes which is not unheard of these days and most definitely not beyond the reach of the Eels possibilities.
It is very clear for ALL to see that The Eels were robbed of the opportunity of using their brilliant attacking skills "when they really needed it & were very desperate to perform said skills", but Wrestlemania put an end to this.
If the Eels could be beaten in 1998 by the Dogs in the final 11 minutes of the GF preliminary when leading 18 to 4 then the brilliant attacking Eels of 2009 could have beaten The Melbourne Storm in the final eleven minutes as well.
Unfortunately and at great cost to the Eels they did not have a level playing field to provide them with the environment to put on a final 11 minute blow away the Storm spectacular.
As I said........... The NRL has a lot to answer for their "Lack Of Duty Of Care" to ALL their consumers/customers. They should be sued "BIG-TIME" by everyone who loves and supports Rugby League.
Without fairness we have Tyranny/Dictatorship determining outcomes and that is exactly the policies of a dictatorship I witnessed being supported and carried out by NRL employees, representatives and contractors at last nights NRL grand final.
-------------------------------------------
05-10-2009, 11:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by distortedchaos
No they don't. Consistency is one of those things that every sporting code yearns for but none achieves, and no game ever will achieve. You just deal with it and live with it.
Bullsh*t, you are saying that the NRL has two referees who can't count in seconds before a penalty is issued for taking too long to get off the ball player.
Bullsh*t, you are saying that the NRL has two referees and two linesmen who can't measure out 10 meters for the defence, particularly with a playing field marked out in ten meter stripes across it which can easily be used as reference points for the ten meters.
By applying LOGIC you get PRACTICALITY and from that you get much much closer to CONSISTENCY (CERTAINTY) than the NRL is presently dishing up to its paying customers/consumers, that being UNCERTAINTY and INCONSISTENCY.
And then we have another referee looking over the game like God, with access to every TV camera to adjudicate quickly any major 50/50 decision if he so chose to quickly step in. Geees, they could have two video refs operating in all major games, one for checking play-backs while the other checking real-time. Both could whisper in the ear of the refs on the field if something is terribly wrong effecting the outcome of a game. The refs already allow 2/3/4/5 play the balls to ensue and then go back to an earlier error/indiscretion of the Rules that went against the attacking team.
If the NRL can't take "full responsibility" for the duty of care they have entrusted to them by their paying customers then get rid of the NRL and bring in a group who will take "full responsibility".
As mentioned with a previous post...."What We Love Comes With Full Responsibility At-All-Times Otherwise It Ain't Love."
Does the NRL love Rugby League or is this "supposed" love misplaced elsewhere, more love on business, law and commerce than on the love for the greatest game of all????
-------------------------------------------
05-10-2009, 11:55 PM
Re: A breach of contract? Quote:
Originally Posted by distortedchaos
Ok - name a professional sport that has total consistency throughout a season that lasts at least 6 months, has different human umpires/referees for each game and has at least half as many variables in decisions As we do in league.
If you can do that, then I may start listening to you. Until then, you haven't sold me on your idea.
This discussion/debate is about the love for rugby league we (members of this forum) have. We are not talking about other professional sports because they have NOTHING to do with Rugby League unless you are into having an affair with a mistress, bringing in a 3rd party (a stranger) not involved in this marriage (contract) between supporters of rugby league and the administrators who are supposed to represent the best interests of the supporters (paying customers) of rugby league.
Consistency comes from an attitude to give/create/provide the very best without compromises/short cuts/excuses/justifications, etc, etc.
You can argue for all the limitations you have and sure enough they are yours! If the fruits of the tree are rotten season after season then its best to chop down that fruit tree and replace it with a tree that will grow into producing fruits that are not rotten, season after season.
If your standards are to accept second best all-the-time and you are armed with a series of excuses and justifications that will maintain your second best standards then you are no different to the fruit tree which produces rotten fruit every season.
There is a prevalent "ATTITUDE" problem awash in the NRL and this has impacted the organisation that operates and governs NRL referees!!!!
Its all about taking "FULL-RESPONSIBILITY" but the NRL employees, contractors, representatives and its referees are provided with "legal havens" that washes their hands clean of all their self-created dirt and to which allows them to "PASS-THE-BUCK".
With back-doors available to be used at any given moment we have an organization using it like a revolving-door..... which means they have no commitment to the dream that is the love of rugby league, which also means they do not give a stuff about the millions of supporters who love the greatest game of all.
No marriage/contract can survive while back-doors exist!!!!!
The NRL has a lot to answer for..............
-------------------------------------------
06-10-2009, 09:16 PM
Re: A breach of contract? At first impression it appears that the better team won but could the Eels have won the game if there was a level (fair) playing field which did not restrict the Eels attacking game????
I was at the game and in contrast to the Eels previous weeks performances I felt for the first 60 minutes in the GF the Eels generally played poorly, were nervous and were a bit disorganized. Melbourne were the better team and were definitely on top. But if the Eels attacking game was not restricted could they have effected the course of the game and could they have mounted a sustainable comeback in the last 20 minutes or so to win the GF????
How are any of us to know when the opportunity for the Eels to attack was consistently being hindered by the referees who turned a blind eye to blowing the whistle for Melb Storm offenses which in most other games during the 2009 NRL would have produced penalties and eventually a sin-bin for serial offenders.
Its clear that the referees determined the outcome of the game by supporting the strengths of one team while hindering the strengths of the other!!!
From the beginning of the game would it not have been better to consistently issue penalties to either team who broke the rules? Don't you think that eventually the players would get the message to stop the infringements or eventually end up in the sin-bin or being hooked by the coach for jeopardizing the chances of their team winning the GF. At least the winner would have won on a level (fair) playing field. Is this not what all supporters want to see happen in every game of the greatest game of all????
By the referees turning a blind eye to the rules in the GF they severely damaged the team most effected by such blatant ignorance of fair play!!!!
-------------------------------------------
06-10-2009, 11:56 PM
Re: A breach of contract?
Originally Posted by
EELICIT
Just my 2 cents, but a bunch of legends of the game shook their heads at the 76th minute penalty as archer wasn't playing the quick play the ball all game so it was a complete contradiction to the style of game that was being played. And secondly and also more importantly archer ruled hand in the play at first by doing that gay fist movement and then re'negd and changed his decision to holding the man down. There is another point as archers touchie shouted and signaled knock on but archer ruled hands on the ball. Which directly links itself to his first ruling which was incorrect. Conspiracy theory ???? I think not. Special dispensation to keep the storm alive, and special dispensation due to news limited stocks going through the roof on GF weekend. you make the connection. yes we did lose by missing one on ones etc but there comes a point in time where a second half performance like ours and possibly a drawn game must come into consideration. When that happens we will all be monkeys uncles !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your comment EELICIT says it all!!!!!!
Like I said the NRL has a lot to answer for............
-------------------------------------------
09-10-2009, 12:01 AM
Re: A breach of contract? Quote:
Originally Posted by distortedchaos
Ok - name a professional sport that has total consistency throughout a season that lasts at least 6 months, has different human umpires/referees for each game and has at least half as many variables in decisions As we do in league.
If you can do that, then I may start listening to you. Until then, you haven't sold me on your idea.
You are getting away from the fact that there was a "
HUGE" disparity with the application and enforcement of the "RULES" between the 2009 GF and almost all the previous games of the NRL 2009 season, particularly all the semi/preliminary finals.
Why Is That?????
I agree that it is very difficult for the NRL to have total (perfect) consistency. I can accept a small bandwidth of error due to human nature etc BUT the bandwidth applied during the 2009 GF was not due to human error.....
IT WAS INTENTIONAL!!!!! The bandwidth was "
HUGE"!!!!!
As I said over and over again the NRL has a lot to answer for.........
