What was the NZRL thinking?

[Sam_the_man]

Archer has been appointed to ref the final in Brisbane on saturday. After his display in the England vs Australia test in Melbourne how on earth can he have been awarded the final?
Three questions. Why have the NZRL dropped there trousers and allowed this to happen? What has Archer done to be rewarded with the final? What did Silverwood do wrong in the Eden Park test to miss out on the final?
I've been a stauch rugby league supporter all my life and that will never ever change but i sometimes wonder if it wouldn't be easier following another sport that gets this sort of thing right.

 

[mrpwnd]

Archer is the best referee in the world...
Hahahaha.

 

[shane87]

Why is Archer employed at all, I have to say I've never liked the guy, but after his last effort my opinion has changed somewhat.

The dude's a clown.

 

[meltiger]

Archer has been appointed to ref the final in Brisbane on saturday. After his display in the England vs Australia test in Melbourne how on earth can he have been awarded the final?
Three questions. Why have the NZRL dropped there trousers and allowed this to happen? What has Archer done to be rewarded with the final? What did Silverwood do wrong in the Eden Park test to miss out on the final?
I've been a stauch rugby league supporter all my life and that will never ever change but i sometimes wonder if it wouldn't be easier following another sport that gets this sort of thing right.

Penalising Shillington for belting that South Sydney clown who slapped him in the face

 

[Bobby DIGital]

Bluey wouldn't of stood for this.

 

[westie]

I'm sure both teams would rather play under the interpretations they've played under all year (as close as possible) than Silverwood. The bias thing is ridiculous.

 

[ozbash]

This is a disgrace, not really surprising but a disgrace.

philippa@nzrl.co.nz is the person to share your view with, very nice lady who hasnt made the rules, just passes the news on.

 

[ozbash]

The bias thing is ridiculous.

yea, sure...

 

[hutch]

the fact that our sport doesnt have neautral referees for international matches shows how amateur it is and how close we are to having two seperate games with different rules. one called rugby league and the other called nrl.

 

[SEAT 1A]

This is a disgrace, not really surprising but a disgrace.

Agree. The NZRL should tell the IRL and ARL to get furged. If the final was to be given to the referee on a referee's performance, Archer had no chance.

 

[LunarPark]

The sport needs a unified set of rules. I can barely tell which set of rules is being played in each game. There is supposed to be a unifed set of rules for international league but in this tournament it just seems they either play SL or NRL interpretation.

The game has 3 different sets of rules. All of which appear to be in play through out this tournament.

 

[Perth Red]

ridiculous you wouldn't use a neutral ref when English SL refs are just as good (or just as bad depending on your opinion) as a Australian ref, especially Archer!

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

All to do with rule interpretations.

 

[deluded pom?]

Read post #9 TEZZA.

 

[ozenzud]

Actually, if you watch that game last week, its my view that NZ were penalised by having the pommy ref in charge and they'd be better with an NRL referee. The kiwis game plan was a touch football game plan, drive (read dummy half run), drive, drive spin it and have FPritchard or SKD hitting a retreating defence out wide.

Trouble was, that Silverwood allowed smith, gallen and co to lay all over the PTB and interfer in the ruck, which gave the Oz defence time to react and muscle up. An NRL ref would have penalised them and maybe given NZ more momentum. To make matters worse for the Kiwis, the Aussie forwards won the tackle more often and the kiwis game plan was ineffective on two fronts......the tactic is a mid 2000's game plan anyway which worries me a tad.

An NRL ref, Australian or otherwise, for these two teams, creates a more level playing feild than having a neutral ref. The kiwis WILL however get the rough end of the pinneaple with the 50/50 calls with an Aussie ref. As long as they don't get the 60/40 calls going against them, it'll be OK. Video refs, well thats another subject and they must all be up there smoking dope, they are on something.

 

[mean_maori_mean]

Actually, if you watch that game last week, its my view that NZ were penalised by having the pommy ref in charge and they'd be better with an NRL referee. The kiwis game plan was a touch football game plan, drive (read dummy half run), drive, drive spin it and have FPritchard or SKD hitting a retreating defence out wide.

Trouble was, that Silverwood allowed smith, gallen and co to lay all over the PTB and interfer in the ruck, which gave the Oz defence time to react and muscle up. An NRL ref would have penalised them and maybe given NZ more momentum. To make matters worse for the Kiwis, the Aussie forwards won the tackle more often and the kiwis game plan was ineffective on two fronts......the tactic is a mid 2000's game plan anyway which worries me a tad.

An NRL ref, Australian or otherwise, for these two teams, creates a more level playing feild than having a neutral ref. The kiwis WILL however get the rough end of the pinneaple with the 50/50 calls with an Aussie ref. As long as they don't get the 60/40 calls going against them, it'll be OK. Video refs, well thats another subject and they must all be up there smoking dope, they are on something.

Best post I read all day.
No more posts required in the thread.

And its the truth - pommy ref let gallen and go lie on the ptb allday.
Kiwis had nothing.

They have picked mckendry and beastwood to use pure size and against a VERY SMALL 10m and slow ruck.

GOD

 

[westie]

Stop talking sense. Archer will clearly ensure that Australia win, just as he ensured England's backs not only continued their penchant for not tackling, but also learnt how to drop the ball every time they touched it.

Why the Kiwis would want to play under an English set of rules is beyond me.

 

[rnb11]

Last week Kiwi fans blamed the new haka for their loss, now they're already blaming the ref for their loss this weekend, when will they blame the NZ players for being so sh*t?

 

[Fonzie]

Actually, if you watch that game last week, its my view that NZ were penalised by having the pommy ref in charge and they'd be better with an NRL referee. The kiwis game plan was a touch football game plan, drive (read dummy half run), drive, drive spin it and have FPritchard or SKD hitting a retreating defence out wide.

Trouble was, that Silverwood allowed smith, gallen and co to lay all over the PTB and interfer in the ruck, which gave the Oz defence time to react and muscle up. An NRL ref would have penalised them and maybe given NZ more momentum. To make matters worse for the Kiwis, the Aussie forwards won the tackle more often and the kiwis game plan was ineffective on two fronts......the tactic is a mid 2000's game plan anyway which worries me a tad.

Good analysis. The other problem last week was that the timing when they went wide wasn't quite good enough for Pritchard/SKD/Sau to break through (and Tate and co defended bloody well).

I don't have a problem with the game plan - it plays to the Kiwi's strongest positions (hooker and backrow), and suits Benji's style. They are never going to beat Australia playing a structured St george type game - they have more errors in them and less pace out wide. If the Aussies are tight enough around the ruck and win the forward battle the Kiwis are sunk, but this gives the Kiwis their best shot. As long as the ref lets them build momentum.