Ref and Bunker Decisions

[JokerEel]

Saturday - Offside
Sunday - Onside

 

[T-Boon]

Discussed this in the match thread, but the disruptor penalty on Capewell was a joke. He made no contact and provided no significant disruption, apart from being there.

I think we are trying to discourage so many bombs. The entire attacking plan revolves around bombing now. So make it harder.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

I think we are trying to discourage so many bombs. The entire attacking plan revolves around bombing now. So make it harder.

The disruptor penalties sure don’t do that.

 

[Big Pete]

Here's one Brisbane got away with on the weekend.


It seems like one of the key indicators of the Capewell penalty was that he withdrew his hands and didn't make a legitimate attempt to catch the ball. I'm fine with it since it was becoming a cynical option and there were instances where players would just smash the fullback/winger out of the way and claim the spoils.

However it's far too subjective and some referees are too lenient.

 

[skeepe]

Saturday - Offside
Sunday - Onside

View attachment 86612

What am I supposed to be looking at here?

 

[JokerEel]

What am I supposed to be looking at here?

Smithies in front of the line on the dropout.

 

[kurt faulk]

referees

This is all you need to say.

You could have the best rule in the world and these guys would manage to stuff it up with their inconsistencies. We see it every week.

.

 

[Someguy]

Disagree. Either contest the ball or GTFO.

Can’t hang around to make the tackle once the ball is caught?

 

[Vee]

Can’t hang around to make the tackle once the ball is caught?

Absolutely, but you can't have it both ways.

 

[T-Boon]

The disruptor penalties sure don’t do that.

it makes it harder to get some big outcome out of bombs.
I think they should tighten the screws on bombs. As an example I think the kicking team should definitely have to catch it on the full to end up with the ball - if it hits the round it should just be receiving teams ball.

 

[snickers007]

it makes it harder to get some big outcome out of bombs.
I think they should tighten the screws on bombs. As an example I think the kicking team should definitely have to catch it on the full to end up with the ball - if it hits the round it should just be receiving teams ball.

OK I'll bite.
How do you define a bomb?

 

[T-Boon]

OK I'll bite.
How do you define a bomb?

I wouldn’t.
I would define an attacking kick as either a chip kick or grubber.
Then everything else is a defensive type downtown kick or a bomb - either of those they should clamp down on with rules like the above. Bring some skill back to the last tackle play.

 

[Saxon]

So, based on what Annesley said yesterday;

If a player is deemed to be offside at a chargedown of a field goal attempt it's six again. Only if play breaks down is it a penalty.
If a player charges the ball down legally at a field goal attempt it's six again.

So based on what Annesley said yesterday; unless the kicking team don't regather the ball there is effectively no penalty for being offside and impacting a field goal attempt.
Very typical NRL.

 

[Penrith fan]

It should be a penality

 

[Iamback]

So, based on what Annesley said yesterday;

If a player is deemed to be offside at a chargedown of a field goal attempt it's six again. Only if play breaks down is it a penalty.
If a player charges the ball down legally at a field goal attempt it's six again.

So based on what Annesley said yesterday; unless the kicking team don't regather the ball there is effectively no penalty for being offside and impacting a field goal attempt.
Very typical NRL.

correct. Although the bunker will review it but ignore the off side...

So stupid

 

[Penrith fan]

Why cant the bunker make a decision here.

Christ knows, we have them make a decision on everything else.

 

[gerg]

So, based on what Annesley said yesterday;

If a player is deemed to be offside at a chargedown of a field goal attempt it's six again. Only if play breaks down is it a penalty.
If a player charges the ball down legally at a field goal attempt it's six again.

So based on what Annesley said yesterday; unless the kicking team don't regather the ball there is effectively no penalty for being offside and impacting a field goal attempt.
Very typical NRL.

I don't understand the point Annesley has attempted to make, by singling out Badgers performance. Does he want all the referees to blow 40+ penalties a game? Why doesn't he do the exact some critique and scrutinise every single game and referee the exact same way? Pick out every mistake in every single game and let's see how that goes. What a f***ing imbecile. Very strange to use his weekly platform to go after one of his own referees like that.

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

I don't understand the point Annesley has attempted to make, by singling out Badgers performance. Does he want all the referees to blow 40+ penalties a game? Why doesn't he do the exact some critique and scrutinise every single game and referee the exact same way? Pick out every mistake in every single game and let's see how that goes. What a f***ing imbecile. Very strange to use his weekly platform to go after one of his own referees like that.

I could give two shits whether one team cops 20+ penalties. REF TO THE RULES. If you want to focus so hard on making sure the "flow of the game" remains entertaining, you're on a fast track to WWE territory.

There is a big difference between a "mistake" and an intentional move coached into the players to try and draw an advantage. Paul merkin is absolutely a merkin, but he is right about one thing: 90% of the dramas when it comes to officiating in the NRL find their source in the coaching staff examining rules within an inch of their lives looking for a loophole to exploit. Bellamy, Robinson and Cleary have made their whole careers out of it. It's well past time the NRL tells them to get f**ked; this code wasn't made for them to feather their own nests with.

 

[Saxon]

I could give two shits whether one team cops 20+ penalties. REF TO THE RULES. If you want to focus so hard on making sure the "flow of the game" remains entertaining, you're on a fast track to WWE territory.

They tried this 7 or 8 years ago. It was starting to work well and infringements were reducing. Players were even playing the ball with their foot! The fans approved and the game was improving.
Then there was one game (I'm thinking maybe Storm v Sharks?) with a combination of poor discipline and an over enthusiastic ref. Many penalties.
So Phool Gould and the Channel Nein commentary cadre got up in arms and made a screaming fuss about it and it all went away.

 

[gerg]

I could give two shits whether one team cops 20+ penalties. REF TO THE RULES. If you want to focus so hard on making sure the "flow of the game" remains entertaining, you're on a fast track to WWE territory.

There is a big difference between a "mistake" and an intentional move coached into the players to try and draw an advantage. Paul merkin is absolutely a merkin, but he is right about one thing: 90% of the dramas when it comes to officiating in the NRL find their source in the coaching staff examining rules within an inch of their lives looking for a loophole to exploit. Bellamy, Robinson and Cleary have made their whole careers out of it. It's well past time the NRL tells them to get f**ked; this code wasn't made for them to feather their own nests with.

You only need to read a gameday thread to see that a rule or a penalty could be blown every second tackle. You may want our game to look like rugby union but I certainly don't.