Ref and Bunker Decisions

[Manu Vatuvei]

My understanding has always been that penalty tries are based on an assessment of how likely a try was at the time of the foul play, if the defender had followed the rules. It is not a case of ‘remove the defender entirely’ which is a rugby union interpretation.

This seems to be an unpopular opinion, but I can understand the DWZ no-try on the basis that when Marzhew tackles him, he is just in the process of catching a high kick. At that point I don’t think you can say he was odds on to score. DWZ had to get to ground from a high position and Marzhew could’ve attempted a legal tackle. I think that’s what Butler meant by ‘we don’t give those’.

I think what confuses matters is that Marzhew did such a poor job of his illegal tackle that DWZ should’ve still scored anyway. If Marzhew caught him above his head and threw him into the stands, would we be having the same debate?

 

[Valheru]

DWZ jumped into the defender, whats he meant to do? Disappear? or just let him score?

You used to be able to tackle an attacker in that air in that instance but the rule was changed a few years back.

The defender is supposed to challenge for the ball in the air. If they fail to, then yes they have to let them score in that situation.

 

[no name]

I’m not sure Annesley and the refs are on the same page. Also, interesting comment by Annesley that the rules are very clear on potential penalty try situations when himself and Butler hadcompletely different interpretations on the latest incident.

There is a breakdown on communication somewhere.

Butler’s explanation to SJ at halftime:

‘We don’t give penalty tries for that’: Warriors denied by bunker’s controversial call as Knights grind out ugly win – The Roar

“It’s just a penalty, we don’t give penalty tries for that,” referee Chris Butler explained to Johnson after he protested the bunker’s decision.

“I agree with you, but our interpretation which is comp-wide, is we don’t give penalty tries in those circumstances,” the ref could be heard responding. “I’m not disagreeing with you, but we have to be consistent through the year.”

What Annesley said:

NRL news 2024 | Dallin Watene-Zelezniak no try; Billy Slater exclusive comments; Graham Annesley explanation, press conference

However, head of football Graham Annesley moved to quash those claims on Monday.

"There is no policy from the NRL, the commission, management or anyone else that stops an incident like that from being considered for a penalty try," he said.

"It's still up to the match officials, still up to them to decide based on what took place and of course no two incidents will ever be exactly the same.

"It's not an automatic penalty try, there's no such thing as an automatic penalty try, that's a matter that's open to the judgement of match officials, in this case the Bunker.

"But there's no policy that penalty tries can not be considered in this situation."

Watch the 2024 NRL premiership live and free on Nine and 9Now.

As for the actual decision-making process and why it wasn't a penalty try, Annesley believes there was 'too much doubt' from the Bunker to award it.

"People will argue one way or another that of course he was going to score the try if he hadn't been contacted," he said.

"But the rules make it very clear that's a decision that either the referee, if the referee had made the decision based on what they saw live, or if the Bunker on a review have to determine if a try would've been scored, not could've been scored, had it not been for the interference in this case.

Newcastle held on for a gritty 14-8 victory on Sunday afternoon in wet conditions.

 

[Apey]

The tackling an attacking player in the air rule is as stupid as the shoulder charge rule to me. Players who get it wrong (i.e high contact, taking out the legs) should be punished accordingly. It shouldn't be a blanket ban but the way the game is going there's no real point in arguing that.

I don't think they have ever award a penalty try for this situation in the past. Maybe they will now after Annesley's comments. The fact they haven't to me is an admission that the rule is just there for appearances.

 

[Apey]

You used to be able to tackle an attacker in that air in that instance but the rule was changed a few years back.

The defender is supposed to challenge for the ball in the air. If they fail to, then yes they have to let them score in that situation.

The idea that because a player jumps for a ball in a try-scoring situation (a circumstance that is entirely optional to put themselves into) they should basically have free passage to scoring a try is really bizarre to me. I'm surprised it's not exploited regularly.

 

[Penrith fan]

If you think you can do a better job, go and do it. Go and put your hand up to be a referee,” Billy Slater said on his podcast. The issue isn't about that, Willliam. It's comparable to suggesting that if she were a better player, she should volunteer to play. Isn't Badger a qualified referee? Shouldn't there be an expectation for her to perform at her best? While referees should not be subjected to abuse, it's important not to conflate legitimate criticism with abuse.

I will say firstly that i think she went no worse on the weekend then about 3 or 4 of her male counterparts , but got no more criticism then they got either. when you're an NRL referee rightly or wrongly you will get criticised heavily. Some of the calls on the weekend defied belief & when there is no accountability & when these same clowns continue to get appointed despite their poor performances well the complaining will continue too.

Let's face it, NRL and AFL don't have "real" laws, they have suggestions or directions that the referee should follow and another suggestion or directive that is exactly the opposite that they should follow.

Both sports are shit shows of unenforceable rules that can be manipulated depending on who and whom is the infringer and the infringe and the person blowing the whistle.

 

[gordsy]

Arguments like if you think you can do better are such a shit argument. I yelled at a woman driver who almost hit me last week. Does that mean I need to cut my dick off and become a woman. I'm sure like most of us he's complained about food at a restaurant. Does this mean we can only complain if we go to culinary school and work as a chef. People have been bagging refs and players since the game started. Now can It go too far, sure but why is Kasey Badger wants to ref in the first grade with the blokes then you can't whinge when people bag her like they do men.

 

[Valheru]

The idea that because a player jumps for a ball in a try-scoring situation (a circumstance that is entirely optional to put themselves into) they should basically have free passage to scoring a try is really bizarre to me. I'm surprised it's not exploited regularly.

Yeah I definitely agree, you should be able to tackle the attacker in the air but as you said if you get it wrong there is a high penalty.

In this case I would argue he actually tackled him in the air AND before he had the ball so a penalty on two accounts in the modern game

 

[Rod]

Tonight's game a great example of how bad not just the bunker but the systems themselves have become. Bog-standard knock ons being turned into mind-numbing challenges where a tiny slap that had nothing to do with the knock on itself turns into a penalty.

The challenge system needs to be canned, or at least make it like the NBA where once the challenge is used it's gone, whether it was successful or not.

 

[Frailty]

'Rugby league died tonight': One moment stuns greats​

Story by Simon Brunsdon
• 7h • 3 min read
View attachment 87771
Some of rugby league's biggest legends have taken aim at the NRL's Bunker over a bizarre call during Thursday night's game.

League icon Paul Vautin could not believe the Bunker's decision to penalise Bromwich.

"Are you serious? Our game is finished," Vautin fumed in commentary for Nine.

"It is finished if you are penalising that. Honestly. I bet you the bloke who made that decision has never stepped on to a football field. What a stitch-up."

"They got it wrong, without a doubt," Darren Lockyer said.

Look, we just want consistency," Thurston told Nine. "Like Fatty (Vautin) said, rugby league has died tonight after seeing that."


"It was embarrassing for the game," Vautin said.

"There is not one player in the last 116 years who would say that's a penalty.

It's this kind of hyperbole that's worse for the game. Jesus, the carry on from people who are meant to help promote the game is ridiculous.

 

[Penrith fan]

I suppose this is the key issue for me - I literally have zero issue with people missing a borderline forward pass, or a small knock on in contact or whatever. We are all humans, we make mistakes in the heat of the moment.

But when the bunker misses clear infringements like offsides, clear knock ons, interprets things differently week to week and does so with the benefit of time and technology and multiple camera angles and super slow-no etc. it’s inexcusable - inferring people criticising the referees shouldn’t do so as they’re human and in the heat of the moment is such a Scott Morrison deflection it’s not funny. The majority of the criticism is for stuff they SHOULD reasonably be expected to pick up.

Coming out and saying the criticism is unfair, after he consistently comes out on a Monday apologising for the weekend’s decisions just shows how out of his depth he is. If i was continuously apologising for my employees mistakes, i’d be teaching them not to make them, or making it easier to not make them.

 

[Rod]

Isaiah Papali'i not ending up in the bin for the most blatant foot trip you'll see near the try line was baffling.

 

[Slackboy72]

Atkins v the rules: discuss...

 

[Saxon]

Looking forward to Annesley explaining the Harry Grant sin bin...

 

[PARRA_FAN]

Isaiah Papali'i not ending up in the bin for the most blatant foot trip you'll see near the try line was baffling.

That was a send off years ago. The fact that he stayed on the field and Grant goes to the bin is ridiculous. Looking forward to the excuses from Annersley.

 

[mozza91]

There was more intent in Harry Grant’s then there was in Freddy Lussick’s on Ilias and he got 4 weeks. Neither of them should be penalties though.

 

[mave]

If it was good enough for the bible basher Aiolia on SJ, it's good enough for Harry Grant.

All we want is consistency.

Enjoy your week off Harry.

 

[Chimp]

How about the disrupter call against Nikora? He’s clearly trying to pat the ball back, and goes within a bees dick of touching the ball, yet they call disrupter, not only on the pitch, but in the bunker too, what a crock of shite that rule is!

 

[Penrith fan]

Looking forward to Annesley explaining the Harry Grant sin bin...

That was possibly the worst sin binning in the history of the game.

I'm sick of Referees influencing and ruining games.


Use some common sense for God's sake.

Atkinson was barely touched.


It changed the whole game as well. It may have ruined Melbourne's season.

If I was Bellyache, I would be livid.

That decision is the exact opposite of what we want to happen to our game.

And there is zero accountability in our profession.

 

[Penrith fan]

‘Rules are the rules’: Melbourne crowd erupts after Storm captain Harry Grant sin-binned for misdemeanour

‘What has happened to rugby league?’ Great fumes, Grant shocked by ‘line in sand’ sin bin

www.foxsports.com.au

‘What has happened to rugby league?’ Great fumes, Grant shocked by ‘line in sand’ sin bin​

Atkinson appeared to wink at his teammates as the Storm hooker ran off the field.

Ryan Hoffman, meanwhile, said on ABC Sport that “common sense” was needed.

“What has happened to rugby league?” he asked.

“There needs to be some common sense when it comes to the interpretation of the rules.”