Annesley's weakly "Why this happened" report - 2024 edition.

[The Who]

It's been proven that having more officials complicates and delays decisions. Just like in the corporate world companies with one boss are the most decisive and nimble. So when James Graham suggested on NRL360 last night we put 7-8 former players in The Bunker to decide a decision -- majority rules -- the Englishman lost all credibility.
Get back to the on-field ref having the ultimate power but ensure that the touch judges get more involved and help the poor whistleblower out. Having three on-field officials should be enough to get most decisions correct.
How can you be efficient when you have a higher being (The Bunker) second guessing your decisions?
I feel for the refs these days; they are sort of in charge but not really.
The definition of a "sporting contest" is not knowing the outcome. No sport will ever get all calls correct because so many of them are 50:50. The NRL is deluded if it thinks The Bunker has improved our sport, or the spectacle. All it has done is added to controversies.

 

[XV-1]

[/QUOTE]

They should look at the captain challenges

Astonishing that Annesley has come out and stated that Badger will be refereeing this weekend in first grade, the performance over the last two games has been extremely poor for an official.

Nothing to do with gender when the officiating is poor.

Correct me if I am wrong.
Wests had 3 Correct captain challenges against Badger rulings and Bulldogs had one.

Has anyone ever seen 4 Correct captain challenges?

This to me says everything about the quality of Badgers refereeing.

 

[Tragic Eagle]

The bunker is an absolute blight on the game. The only people that don't see it are the NRL and the officials. Please NRL get rid of it. It is a complete waste of money.

 

[StuBoot]

I have a different perspective on this. I feel for the defending winger. He was preparing to catch the ball when DWZ came hurtling through the air over the top of him. What was he supposed to do?
He was competing for the ball but just hadn't time to jump for it.
It seems to me that everything is in favour of the attacking catcher.
Again I ask: What is a defending catcher supposed to do?

I get your point but they all know that you can't tackle in the air - it's for their safety apparently
Yes, it's a tough rule.

Problem is now that players, coaches etc will know it's not a sin bin or penalty try so...watch this space!
There's a new loophole to exploit.

No doubt, if it becomes a defensive play the usual knee jerk reactionary rules committee will see to that, not sure what they'll do but no doubt they'll make something simple complicated.

So riddle me this.

• Why is it a Penalty Try when Sam Walker put in a grubber kick v Saints but not when DWZ was tackled in the air in goal?
• They both were denied the opportunity of a fair try had they not been fouled yet one is a Penalty Try and one isn't.
• If it isn't a Penalty Try then it's generally a Sin Bin, the Knight's player got neither.

Yep, the answer is a pineapple.

 

[Ralphie]

I get your point but they all know that you can't tackle in the air - it's for their safety apparently
Yes, it's a tough rule.

Problem is now that players, coaches etc will know it's not a sin bin or penalty try so...watch this space!
There's a new loophole to exploit.

No doubt, if it becomes a defensive play the usual knee jerk reactionary rules committee will see to that, not sure what they'll do but no doubt they'll make something simple complicated.

So riddle me this.

• Why is it a Penalty Try when Sam Walker put in a grubber kick v Saints but not when DWZ was tackled in the air in goal?
• They both were denied the opportunity of a fair try had they not been fouled yet one is a Penalty Try and one isn't.
• If it isn't a Penalty Try then it's generally a Sin Bin, the Knight's player got neither.

Yep, the answer is a pineapple.

My take is that he didn't tackle him in the air, DWZ simply jumped into his arms and he was left with no choice in the matter.

 

[MissKate]

Remember the days when the touchies actually did something apart from confirming a goal kick and occasionally picking up that someone went out. Give them back their power and the bunker will be less required

 

[StuBoot]

My take is that he didn't tackle him in the air, DWZ simply jumped into his arms and he was left with no choice in the matter.

Yes, but he was penalised for tackling a player in the air which denied him a try.
If he doesn't do that, DWZ scores.
They have now set a precedent.

I just looked at it again, Marzhew didn't try to jump, looked at DWZ and wrapped his arms half heartedly around him, he never looked like contesting the ball.
I can't see why it was just a penalty whether he meant it or not.

 

[globaleagle]

Hello everyone!

It's the thread we all need, but we all hate. That's right, another season of refs boss Annesley's "weakly" report complete with a 5th year of template excuses.

1 - The refs got it right
2 - The refs got it wrong
3 - The refs got it wrong but I'm sick of everyone bagging the refs week in and week out.
4 - The refs got it wrong but "players make mistakes tooooooo."

Did anyone have round 9 for Annesley to bring out point 3 (above)?



And sorry for quoting my own post...but I'm in Panama so it's ok!