Ref's shocker costs Knights
BY PETER STERLING
I rate Sean Hampstead as a referee. As one of our senior whistle-blowers, he is generally in control and relatively consistent.
Unfortunately last weekend it is fair to say that he and his fellow officials had a shocker.
While the Rugby League Week magazine gave his performance a rating of three out of 10, I saw it more as a two. One of those points was for his attendance.
In every game there are contentious decisions. Some are 50-50 calls, others just plain wrong. Over 80 minutes they do tend to affect both teams, not necessarily evening out but generally not too lopsided.
That was until last weekend, when we saw Newcastle cop a veritable procession of tough calls against them in going down to the Dragons.
At the final whistle, the Knights were beaten by just eight points.
The biggest surprise was that it wasn't closer to 28.
In the aftermath, NRL referees coach Robert Finch has expressed his disappointment in Sean's performance, agreeing that there were some decisions that were incorrect and that he'd "had better games".
Predictably he defended the more controversial decisions involving a Chase Stanley try and James McManus no-try. In the referee's defence, the former wasn't his call.
There is no defence, however, against the litany of ordinary rulings that continually went against the home side as a result of Hampstead's whistle.
The Stanley try, given as a benefit of the doubt by the man upstairs, still beggars belief, although it isn't on its own. There have been a few similar situations in recent weeks.
On Sunday's Footy Show I highlighted five try-scoring incidents which have convinced me I now have no idea what constitutes a four-pointer these days.
They included a no-try against the Tigers' Beau Ryan in round 12 and favourable decisions for Mark O'Meley in round 14, Sam Perrett and Amos Roberts in round 16 and, of course, Chase Stanley in round 17.
Of the five, the only one that appeared to be legitimate was the one denied to Ryan.
O'Meley dropped the ball (or "separation" as they are calling it now) against the Panthers while attempting to score. But apparently that's OK if you put your hand back on it as it hits the ground. If the same thing happened on halfway, it's an obvious knock-on.
Roberts also lost the football two weeks ago against the Bulldogs but again got the nod. In his ninth year of first-grade football, Amos shook his head, ruefully knowing that he had bombed the opportunity. The green light showed that even our experienced players are confused.
In the same match, Perrett never got a decent play on grounding the football but did manage to brush it with both little fingers. That was good enough for a try.
Which brings us to the Stanley decision on Saturday night. If it was not so important, it would be downright comical. In no way did the talented youngster have any control of the football once it connected with the boot of Jarrod Mullen. I am all for the benefit of the doubt going to the attacking team, but not when there is no doubt.
After viewing these incidents, what I find totally confusing is that there is now no ownership of the football required in scoring a try.
When did this vital part of the game change so much that actually having the ball in your possession is no longer needed?
When questioned as to whether Newcastle and their fans should feel hard done by, Finch said that "anyone that looks at it in a rational manner and considers the errors made by players that contributed to tries may take another view".
Not me. That is a way-too-simplistic assessment that shows scant understanding.
From a man in his position, we should expect more.
Consistent poor calls made against one team have a devastating effect in the modern game when it comes to momentum, pressure, fatigue and even frustration.
Decisions have repercussions which may not be immediately obvious but which will be eventually felt.
For example, a bad decision which results in a line drop-out can lead to consecutive sets in defence and possibly more drop-outs.
All that tackling can easily lead to a mistake when the defending team finally gets the ball.
That mistake builds up further pressure and so on.
A try may eventually be scored many minutes after the initial tough call following the type of player error that Finch is alluding to.
However, make no mistake that the origin of such an error can often be traced back to a catalyst that occurred earlier in the game.
In my opinion, the Knights were forced to endure a more difficult night than they should have had to.
I'm not taking anything away from St George Illawarra.
They were good enough to take advantage of proceedings and went on to be the better side over the 80 minutes on the night.
But it is my belief that Newcastle were not afforded the same opportunity to be that better side.
Link
