Ref and Bunker Decisions

[Bazal]

I say this as someone that hates JWH.

He went through the line and was watching the play all the way, Not sure you expect to impede a defender in a try scoring situation 15m away.

Hence the reason black and white rules don't work in footy.

Take offsides, There would be a penalty every
set if Refs followed the rules black and white.

Most tackles have hands on the ball, again you could have a penalty in every tackle.

Referees are trusted to police them when they feel the need, Yet in these cases they aren't?

My guy if you're not bright enough to understand that you can't impede a defender, whether it's a decoy run or an escort or running them off the ball or tackling them without it or whatever example you want to use to distract from your own inability to understand the concept, then I'm not sure this thread is the place for you.

 

[Vee]

I know you were a ref, How many stoppages is the game getting if everytime someone was offside a penalty was blown?

Worse than onion. My standard was "how much did it influence play?" Then it becomes a judgement call.

I used to stack breaches as well. Let a few go if they weren't too bad but ping them when the other mob knocked on for example. The smart ones learned and complied, the dumb ones kept getting pinged.

 

[Apey]

The JWH obstruction was a bad call. The purpose of the rule is to not stop in the line of defenders, preventing them from sliding or providing a gap for your own player. That "line" is not any random line past the defensive line where a fullback might be.

 

[Vee]

NRL admits failure in Bunker system that 'doesn't work'

Roosters dudded by twin calls

wwos.nine.com.au

I didn't see the ST one properly and it seems general agreement Edwards wouldn't have got there. I'm open to either call but want consistency.

 

[T-Boon]

Maybe if it is an obstruction and a milk it should be replay that tackle.

 

[Iamback]

The JWH obstruction was a bad call. The purpose of the rule is to not stop in the line of defenders, preventing them from sliding or providing a gap for your own player. That "line" is not any random line past the defensive line where a fullback might be.

Black and white rule leads to this

 

[Iamback]

I didn't see the ST one properly and it seems general agreement Edwards wouldn't have got there. I'm open to either call but want consistency.

The ST one he wouldn't of got there either so both were tries imo, seems NRL agrees

 

[T-Boon]

The ST one he wouldn't of got there either so both were tries imo, seems NRL agrees

Listen if they go your way and inevitably f**k it up with total inconsistency and uncertainty then I want you in here answering for it.

 

[Danny-Boy]

My guy if you're not bright enough to understand that you can't impede a defender, whether it's a decoy run or an escort or running them off the ball or tackling them without it or whatever example you want to use to distract from your own inability to understand the concept, then I'm not sure this thread is the place for you.

This post wasn’t directed at me but you’re f**king embarrassing yourself.

Annesley used an example last week where Penrith’s lead runner impeded a defender in the defensive line and said the referee used discretion and deemed the player would not have made an impact to the try.

at the 5.30 mark.

"If Jake's not there we would know today if Tom goes through that hole or not" - Annesley

Graham Annesley discusses the bunkers reasoning for disallowing Toluta'u Koula's try in defeat to the Eels in Round 3

www.nrl.com

 

[Bazal]

NRL: *makes obstruction rule to give referees discretion.

NRL fans:

NRL: Oooooook let's make it black and white and stop lazy Merkins taking out defenders

NRL fans:

 

[Bazal]

This post wasn’t directed at me but you’re f**king embarrassing yourself

Oh no a bloke who has approximately one thousand posts tearfully winging about Mitchell Moses arm position thinks I'm embarrassing myself!

Of course there's still some limited discretion you crumb, it can hardly be an obstruction of the left winger is taken out on the left touch line and the try is scored by the other winger on the other side...

 

[SLRBRONCOS]

The bunker official is doing the best that he can!!

 

[Iamback]

My guy if you're not bright enough to understand that you can't impede a defender, whether it's a decoy run or an escort or running them off the ball or tackling them without it or whatever example you want to use to distract from your own inability to understand the concept, then I'm not sure this thread is the place for you.

Well put NRL in that boat of not understanding their own rule

 

[Iamback]

Listen if they go your way and inevitably f**k it up with total inconsistency and uncertainty then I want you in here answering for it.

But no 2 situations are the same, So you aren't going to get consistency but they should be assessed on their merit

 

[Danny-Boy]

Oh no a bloke who has approximately one thousand posts tearfully winging about Mitchell Moses arm position thinks I'm embarrassing myself!

Of course there's still some limited discretion you crumb, it can hardly be an obstruction of the left winger is taken out on the left touch line and the try is scored by the other winger on the other side...

oh now you’re back peddling saying there is some discretion? You said it was black and white.

And Mitch Moses deserves all the shit he gets he spends half his time in the game with his hands in the air haha.

 

[Iamback]

Intent or otherwise isn't really relevant.

You can't deny a defender the opportunity, purposely or not.

Intent is or should be. Accidents happen in a game, In this case JWH wasn't looking or expecting the fullback here.

NRL has said it was a wrong call because he was through the defensive line.

Which is how it should be.

 

[Bazal]

oh now you’re back peddling saying there is some discretion? You said it was black and white.

I'm not backpedalling at all. You can't deny the defender and opportunity. Black and white.

That doesn't mean there's absolutely zero discretion. There are obviously some situations where the obstruction has no impact at all.

If you can explain how the left winger has an opportunity to tackle the right winger on the other touchline 10m out then you can make comments about backpedalling.

 

[This Year?]

For a bunker decision to be correct it needs to pass the "would it be given for the Tigers or the Dragons?" test.

Any tiny bit of doubt = NO TRY

 

[SBD82]

For a bunker decision to be correct it needs to pass the "would it be given for the Tigers or the Dragons?" test.

Any tiny bit of doubt = NO TRY

I’m looking forward to the soccer scores.

 

[T-Boon]

Looking at the replay of last nights controversy I am certain annersly is wrong. Why is his opinion the NRL opinion? Is he the Pope?
The fullback has to dodge the ref that’s why he changed direction, it was going to be hard for him to get there but he is trying and if he gets there they practice holding the attacker up so it is a possibility, up until he runs into the decoy who shouldn’t be in the road.