Referees Making Up the Rules on the Spot Thread

[Tiger5150]

Lately I have notice a new trend in Refereeing. Referees have always ruled on interpretations of the Rules, but lately the new trend Ive picked up on is they are now making up new rules as they go.

Last night in the Tigers v Manly there was an infuriating example. Manly 3 man tackle on a Tigers player (Nofo from memory?), they grab him and slowly march him to the side line. Referee calls held.....held.......held ......held....HELD...then the Manly players throw him over the touchline. Rules are simple, its a scrum feed to Manly or penalty to the Tigers. Ref makes up a new rule and orders a play the ball 5m in.

Does my head in. I know that the great footy brain that is Greenberg has told us that consistency is overrated but to invent new ways of creating inconsistency takes some next level incompetence.

Has anyone else noticed this? Your favourite examples?

 

[Grapple]

If ever there was a thread for Warriors fans.

 

[Someguy]

I just hate that calling ‘held’ is not respected in any way by the defence. How many time do you hear ‘held held held’ the ball runner has stopped trying to fight and is trying to play the ball but the defence continues to drag him to the ground.

If the ball runner throws an offload it gets called back if the defence drives the player back a few metres it’s play on.

 

[AJB1102]

Lately I have notice a new trend in Refereeing. Referees have always ruled on interpretations of the Rules, but lately the new trend Ive picked up on is they are now making up new rules as they go.

Last night in the Tigers v Manly there was an infuriating example. Manly 3 man tackle on a Tigers player (Nofo from memory?), they grab him and slowly march him to the side line. Referee calls held.....held.......held ......held....HELD...then the Manly players throw him over the touchline. Rules are simple, its a scrum feed to Manly or penalty to the Tigers. Ref makes up a new rule and orders a play the ball 5m in.

Does my head in. I know that the great footy brain that is Greenberg has told us that consistency is overrated but to invent new ways of creating inconsistency takes some next level incompetence.

Has anyone else noticed this? Your favourite examples?

The Josh Morris double movement the other week. Was told to play the ball. Either a penalty or a try.

 

[AJB1102]

I just hate that calling ‘held’ is not respected in any way by the defence. How many time do you hear ‘held held held’ the ball runner has stopped trying to fight and is trying to play the ball but the defence continues to drag him to the ground.

If the ball runner throws an offload it gets called back if the defence drives the player back a few metres it’s play on.

Yep!

We don't need a "held" and a "release" call. "Held' should mean "no more offloading and going forwards" for the ball carrier and "let go" for the tacklers.

 

[LineBall]

Yeah, its crap. Bit like how players step off the mark and when playing the ball, and are just told to go back and play it on the spot. Should just be a penalty.

 

[Desert Qlder]

Symptomatic of the 'game manager' approach they are taking.

Not there to enforce rules, but to make the game 'flow' neatly, as drected by eternal hussies like Phil Gould and Andrew Johns.

 

[tumbidragon]

My favorite was a good legal hard hit, can't remember on who... Ceccin blows a penalty and when was rigtly asked what was wrong with the tackle, he came up with 'it was unnecessary'. Still looking for the 'unnecessary hard hit' tackle in the rule book.

 

[Front-Rower]

Wasn't this type of "rule" bought in because players were being penalised for moving off the mark or passing off the ground etc.. because they couldn't "hear" the officials call?

 

[AJB1102]

My favorite was a good legal hard hit, can't remember on who... Ceccin blows a penalty and when was rigtly asked what was wrong with the tackle, he came up with 'it was unnecessary'. Still looking for the 'unnecessary hard hit' tackle in the rule book.

I remember that. Was Jack Williams for Cronulla I think. Can't remember who they were playing.

 

[jaseg]

Perenara (I think) went for either 'unnecessary force' or the even more generic 'it was dangerous' on a 1 on 1 legs tackle by James Gavet on Cameron Munster maybe 3 years ago - basically because Munster pretended to be hurt after it (was fine for the rest of the game, funnily enough). Put him on report, too. That was an absolute pearler.

 

[KOMORI]

Lately I have notice a new trend in Refereeing. Referees have always ruled on interpretations of the Rules, but lately the new trend Ive picked up on is they are now making up new rules as they go.

Last night in the Tigers v Manly there was an infuriating example. Manly 3 man tackle on a Tigers player (Nofo from memory?), they grab him and slowly march him to the side line. Referee calls held.....held.......held ......held....HELD...then the Manly players throw him over the touchline. Rules are simple, its a scrum feed to Manly or penalty to the Tigers. Ref makes up a new rule and orders a play the ball 5m in.

Does my head in. I know that the great footy brain that is Greenberg has told us that consistency is overrated but to invent new ways of creating inconsistency takes some next level incompetence.

Has anyone else noticed this? Your favourite examples?

That play you’ve used as an example... I thought the same thing initially and expected a penalty, but having seen it again they released him with momentum (for lack of a better term) and he kinda just stumbled the rest of the way out... could have been penalised but the play on call wasn’t that bad..

A better example from last night’s game was Manly getting (correctly) penalised for an obstruction/shepherd roughly in the centre of the field, yet an identical obstruction/shepherd in the NEXT SET OF SIX was deemed ok....

I dunno if it’s incompetence or bias or whatever, but it’s these sort of inconsistencies that infuriate me far more than poor interpretations.

If you get it a bit wrong, at the very least be consistent in your mistakes, rather than seemingly referee different teams with different rules...

*I guess when the guy running the game has openly stated “consistency is over rated as a measure of fairness”..... what hope have the referees got??

 

[Diesel]

What ever happened to a voluntary tackle? Last one I saw was Cliffy Lyons in the finals around 93/94 when he broke his ribs. Now it's just a tackle and play the ball

 

[Tiger5150]

That play you’ve used as an example... I thought the same thing initially and expected a penalty, but having seen it again they released him with momentum (for lack of a better term) and he kinda just stumbled the rest of the way out... could have been penalised but the play on call wasn’t that bad..

If a player steps on the line when playing the ball, he is out and its a scrum. That incident last night should have been either a Manly scrum feed or a Tigers penalty, Masters (I remember now) went out. There is simply no way of that resulting in a PTB. It was particularly infuriating last night because at the time I think the penalty count was 7-1 Manly, and the Tigers couldnt even get that one.

*I guess when the guy running the game has openly stated “consistency is over rated as a measure of fairness”..... what hope have the referees got??

Too true. I thought Annesley was going to be part of the answer and he started well (as did the refs) but since about Origin, the refereeing and match review inconsistencies are reaching new depths. It comes from the lack of integrity at the top.

 

[firechild]

If a player steps on the line when playing the ball, he is out and its a scrum.

Wrong. If the player playing the ball steps in the line it is play on. If the ball or the dummy half touch the line, it is a scrum.

 

[yobbo84]

I don't think anything will ever beat the 1989 grand final - Bill Harrigan penalising Bruce McGuire for using an offside marker as a shepherd "Not in the spirit of the game"

 

[Tiger5150]

Wrong. If the player playing the ball steps in the line it is play on. If the ball or the dummy half touch the line, it is a scrum.

Really? If the player playing the ball is holding he ball and touches the line he isnt out? I seem to remember a player getting to his feet and touching the line with his hand and he was out.

 

[firechild]

Really? If the player playing the ball is holding he ball and touches the line he isnt out? I seem to remember a player getting to his feet and touching the line with his hand and he was out.

This was tested earlier this season where a scrum was called and it was revealed to be an incorrect call after the game. I'm sure someone here can recall the game in question. It's an odd one for sure.

 

[AJB1102]

Man playing the ball can go into touch after the held call when getting to his feet to PTB. Belinda Sharp got it wrong earlier in the year.

 

[TheFrog]

Too true. I thought Annesley was going to be part of the answer and he started well (as did the refs) but since about Origin, the refereeing and match review inconsistencies are reaching new depths. It comes from the lack of integrity at the top.

He's switched from picking up the refs on their many blues, to defending their errors. So he is useless.