Refereeing Standards - It crap! + Ben Hunt Sin Bin threads

[dannyt]

For some reason the refs have been targeting the Dragons for some weeks now. I'm not sure what our ref friendly coach is doing about this, but it is not working.

Hunt was caught off-side and because this was after a number of penalties, he sent Hunt to the sin bin. There should have been a warning.

Apparently the warning came in the 24th minute

 

[Old Timer]

The ref called out to Hunt telling him to stay out of the play and he either didn't hear it or ignored it and that resulted in the sin bin.
It is plainly obvious that if you impede play in your own 20 then you are at serious risk of going to the bin especially if earlier warnings have been given.
So IMO this issue was not directly related to the earlier warning although no doubt the ref would be pissed off that he was again ignored despite giving a clear and audible instruction / warning.

 

[dannyt]

It was a godsend.

10 mins to re-focus and get his head right.

True, but this opens up a can of worms.

1. Against the warriors, Dufty was binned after interfering with a player on a kick.
2. In the same game, the warriors were penalised repeatedly when we were attacking their line.
3. In this game, Hunt gets called offside but makes a play (silly hand waving gestures now constitutes a play) and then was sin-binned.

OK, point 1 has been around all year.

Point 2 has also been around all year, but why aren't repeated infringements a clear professional foul.

Point 3 is new- haven't seen that, but could be wrong.

So if the ref actually called a warrior's player offside and they didn't back off, would that have been an automatic sin bin?

If so, why didn't the ref do that in the same way he did against us on Saturday night?

Too subjective. Too easily manipulated. Should leave a sour taste in every supporter's mouth.

 

[dannyt]

The ref called out to Hunt telling him to stay out of the play and he either didn't hear it or ignored it and that resulted in the sin bin.
It is plainly obvious that if you impede play in your own 20 then you are at serious risk of going to the bin especially if earlier warnings have been given.
So IMO this issue was not directly related to the earlier warning although no doubt the ref would be pissed off that he was again ignored despite giving a clear and audible instruction / warning.

Undoubtedly. So why not call players offside all the time? Inconsistency at its finest.

We are attacking, but the opposition stays offside constantly which spoils our attack.

We are defending, offside, so the ref calls this out. Next thing you know, our player is binned.

I suppose I was wrong about the "inconsistency". We do get a player binned consistently, irrespective of how the rules are interpreted.

Now, if I was prone to delve into conspiracies.....

 

[st penguin]

Too subjective. Too easily manipulated. Should leave a sour taste in every supporter's mouth.

In the future a laser line will appear on the ground exactly 10m from the tackled player. Any player offside will have their jerseys glow red until they get onside.

It will be glorious.

 

[Old Timer]

In the future a laser line will appear on the ground exactly 10m from the tackled player. Any player offside will have their jerseys glow red until they get onside.

It will be glorious.

Or the refereeing will be so inconsistent we will revert to adapting the restarting of each play like Gridiron.

 

[Wittenberg]

Ref called out that Hunt was binned for repeated infringements but Hunt was not, individually penalised before his binning. Therefore one would assume he was binned because of repeated team penalties being given away, yet the penalty count for both teams was pretty even. After Hunt was binned the next 4 penalties in pretty quick succession were awarded against the Tigers but no warning, no sin binning. Two of those penalties occurred within the Tigers' 20. I was a little frustrated watching this....I don't buy the anti St George conspiracies but I do hate the total inconsistency shown by referees. The sin binning could of totally ruined our year.

 

[possm]

In the future a laser line will appear on the ground exactly 10m from the tackled player. Any player offside will have their jerseys glow red until they get onside.

It will be glorious.

The technology already exists for the bunker's screen to have 10m grid lines overlaying the field. a parallel line can be easily inserted at a kickers foot or 10m from the play the ball.

What concerns me most is the inconsistency of refereeing decisions.

 

[st penguin]

Or the refereeing will be so inconsistent we will revert to adapting the restarting of each play like Gridiron.

Referees will be replaced by terminators.

 

[st penguin]

The technology already exists for the bunker's screen to have 10m grid lines overlaying the field. a parallel line can be easily inserted at a kickers foot or 10m from the play the ball.

What concerns me most is the inconsistency of refereeing decisions.

I didn’t know that - although I’ve seen the same technology used in Nfl broadcats.

 

[Sans Souci Sainter]

Undoubtedly. So why not call players offside all the time? Inconsistency at its finest.

We are attacking, but the opposition stays offside constantly which spoils our attack.

We are defending, offside, so the ref calls this out. Next thing you know, our player is binned.

I suppose I was wrong about the "inconsistency". We do get a player binned consistently, irrespective of how the rules are interpreted.

Now, if I was prone to delve into conspiracies.....

Spot on and it’s infuriating as it changes week to week.

I was confident going into the Tigs game just because we copped such a hammering against Parra.

The refs are f**ked.

 

[dannyt]

In the future a laser line will appear on the ground exactly 10m from the tackled player. Any player offside will have their jerseys glow red until they get onside.

It will be glorious.

Ok, good point: Trying to make everything "objective" may fundamentally alter one of the game's characteristics and appeal.

However, I'm talking about the rule's interpretation not the rule itself.

If you give a penalty for offside, you must have decided that they were offside. No need for lasers.

At the time you've decided, you can wait to see what happens then penalise. Alternatively, you can call the player off side then take more drastic action if they get involved.

So wouldn't you think that either application should be consistently applied?

 

[ALSGI]

Referees will be replaced by terminators.

GPS trackers can do this.
Electric shocks for first time offenders.
Small explosives remove limbs for repeated infringements.
Fixed.
Storm and Roosters should trial this on the weekend then Souffs and Nulla the following weekend.
Fixed.

 

[st penguin]

GPS trackers can do this.
Electric shocks for first time offenders.
Small explosives remove limbs for repeated infringements.
Fixed.
Storm and Roosters should trial this on the weekend then Souffs and Nulla the following weekend.
Fixed.

KaBOOM!

Ray Warren: ...hold the phone, there's an explosion in the defensive line. Is that Hunt?...it looks like Hunt is down and bleeding profusely! I think you will find his arm has been blown off....as we are check the replay now....and yes...there it is!...you can see it clearly. Hunt's arm has been blown off.

Gould: No, no, no

Wally Lewis: Hunt is missing an arm now. Arms are good to have. He will miss that arm.

Warren: thanks Wally

 

[st penguin]

View attachment 22593

Ok, good point: Trying to make everything "objective" may fundamentally alter one of the game's characteristics and appeal.

However, I'm talking about the rule's interpretation not the rule itself.

If you give a penalty for offside, you must have decided that they were offside. No need for lasers.

At the time you've decided, you can wait to see what happens then penalise. Alternatively, you can call the player off side then take more drastic action if they get involved.

So wouldn't you think that either application should be consistently applied?

Sorry...not having a dig (i can see how it looks sarcastic)

To be honest I have zero problems with automating objective rules. There are plenty enough subjective rules in the game to retain its characteristics.

The reason I like lasers is that players will always try to get that extra meter and it puts pressure on the ref if he has been calling a lot of penalties ("are you kidding ref? he was like 2 inches offside! put your whistle away...the game isnt about you!)

However, if you make their jersey glow red - well that's on them to get back onside.

 

[Slippery Morris]

What I found disgusting about the refs is Luc clearly get's elbow in the throat by Packer. Bunker shows replay about 5 times to prove it was deliberate and nothing is done, play on. WTF. Leeson does the softest of high tackles and gets penalised shortly afterwards. That showed how obvious it was one sided and Mary should have questioned this elbow to the throat incident.

By the way did the Tigers player get cited?

 

[True_Believer]

KaBOOM!

Ray Warren: ...hold the phone, there's an explosion in the defensive line. Is that Hunt?...it looks like Hunt is down and bleeding profusely! I think you will find his arm has been blown off....as we are check the replay now....and yes...there it is!...you can see it clearly. Hunt's arm has been blown off.

Gould: No, no, no

Wally Lewis: Hunt is missing an arm now. Arms are good to have. He will miss that arm.

Warren: thanks Wally

Blocker: Now that's what I like to see. None of this wimpy shoulder charging or punching. It's a good old fashioned limb removal - we need more of it in the game.

 

[Maxwell]

I was at Penrith v Newcastle on Sat arvo to watch my grandson play, on sunday arvo I watch a replay of that game and Dragons v Tigersand I am convinced that there is a voice in the ear of referees telling them what to call , as calls were being made by on field ref way after the incident occurredeg players tackled , rises and plays ball , dummy half passes , receiver runs 10 yards is tackled , gets up and whistle is blown and we go back to something that happened in last playball , commentators couldn't work out what call was , was a knock on or forward pass both looked ok. Ben Hunts sin binning , the ref didn't get him straight away for off side , he blew the whistle seconds later and made call.The refs are only robots for some one else up in refs box , watching on tv and telling them what to call.

 

[True_Believer]

What I found disgusting about the refs is Luc clearly get's elbow in the throat by Packer. Bunker shows replay about 5 times to prove it was deliberate and nothing is done, play on. WTF. Leeson does the softest of high tackles and gets penalised shortly afterwards. That showed how obvious it was one sided and Mary should have questioned this elbow to the throat incident.

By the way did the Tigers player get cited?

Haven't seen anything on it - There were a few from the Panthers/Knights game and Will Chambers (surprise surprise) has been charged. Nothing about Packer.

 

[dannyt]

Haven't seen anything on it - There were a few from the Panthers/Knights game and Will Chambers (surprise surprise) has been charged. Nothing about Packer.

Wouldn't surprise if he had no case to answer.

Wonder if Russell would receive the same leniency last year...