About time someone in the media said this.

[castle eagle]

After the panthers domination last week, it was obvious that calls seemed to fall their way-as did the amount of time players could spend slowing down the ruck.
below is an excerpt from Paul Crawley's column today:

DRAGONS FARCE EXPOSES BATTLING CLUBS’ ANGER

No wonder battling NRL clubs don’t think they get a fair go.

A week after Gold Coast coach Justin Holbrook took aim at the NRL for the Titans not getting an even crack when it comes to the 50/50 calls, it was well and truly exposed at Kogarah again on Friday night.

And St George Illawarra has every right to be filthy.

Privately, the Dragons have been told over the weekend that they were on the wrong side of several crucial calls during their 20-16 loss to the premiers.

And the first half sin binning of Jaydn Su’A wasn’t the only contentious call that went against them.

The Dragons were also told Zac Lomax should not have been sin binned when he took a player off the ball because it was not a genuine try scoring situation.

While if Ben Hunt would have stayed down after late contact he could have also milked a sin binning.

Throw in the fact the Panthers got three set restarts but the Dragons just one, when it was clear to all watching the game the Panthers were getting away with blue murder at the ruck.

But let’s go back to the Su’a sin binning because that is the call that was ultimately match-defining.

The hit on Panthers playmaker Sean O’Sullivan was not late. It was not even high.

And it should not have been a penalty, let alone a sin bin.

Yet because O’Sullivan stayed down Su’A was marched.

It was a disgraceful call.
here is the link to the rest of it:

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/nrl-tackle-round-2-teams-fume-over-referee-inconsistencies-jaydn-sua-sin-bin/news-story/7e36b9b17f7452ffcdaa807754bb1ec0

 

[jbb/james]

Last week on 360 james graham said something to that point. Reckons data suggested less followed teams copped a reaming

 

[pt73]

Agree with everything Crawley has written but the NRL will either deny everything said or make grovelling apologies about poor ref decisions.

 

[wombatgc]

Annersley will side-step it or blame the refs as per usual. He should’ve stayed in politics.

 

[eaglebuzz]

It was painfully obvious in our match against the Panthers that the ruck wasn't being policed evenly. They had so many six again calls go their way, and we had almost none.

 

[eagleron]

Annersley will side-step it or blame the refs as per usual. He should’ve stayed in politics.

Totally useless bastard

 

[HoldenV8]

It was painfully obvious in our match against the Panthers that the ruck wasn't being policed evenly. They had so many six again calls go their way, and we had almost none.

Adam Gee was only policing one team. Maybe the result wouldn't have changed much, but a fair go is all anyone asks.

 

[Dunder Mifflin]

Adam Gee was only policing one team. Maybe the result wouldn't have changed much, but a fair go is all anyone asks.

We were matching them in the 1st 10 then they started getting all the set restarts

 

[globaleagle]

It's either incompetence or cheating and neither should be swept under the carpet in the guise of "they do a good job, they are human, no one wants to be a ref, and they get -insert some percentage higher than 95- many decisions right."

I've posted before that Bill Harrigan (sp) said they have tip sheets on individual players hence if said sheet tagged a player as a stripper of the ball... no 50-50's were going his way regardless.

which is also the problem, refs ruling on preconceived biases and not what they're seeing and refs feeling the need to inject themselves into the game rather than let it flow.

Remember a couple of years back when penalties were being awarded if players got in the way of a dummy half pass? The next couple of games balls were thrown straight down into a player lying on the ground...and the ref still penalised the player on the ground!!!

That was the level of idiocy back then, and not much has changed I'd suggest.

 

[47MVEagle]

Where in the rules does it state that getting up to play the ball really quickly means you can step over your tackler & render both he & his dummy half marker offside or not square?

Sure, it shortens the 10 metres for the attacking team but it also takes 2 defenders out of the play, so how does that benefit the defending team in any way?

 

[castle eagle]

Where in the rules does it state that getting up to play the ball really quickly means you can step over your tackler & render both he & his dummy half marker offside or not square?

Sure, it shortens the 10 metres for the attacking team but it also takes 2 defenders out of the play, so how does that benefit the defending team in any way?

when its done by the squeels, the riff, the donkeys or the scum its ok

 

[Michael Clare]

Agree wholeheartedly. This "stepping off the mark" tactic has been and remains a blight on the game. Some players e.g. Greg Inglis were absolute masters of the dark art and he was literally never penalised. In fact, he often gained a penalty in doing so! The Storm turned it into an art form.

 

[StuBoot]

Where in the rules does it state that getting up to play the ball really quickly means you can step over your tackler & render both he & his dummy half marker offside or not square?

Sure, it shortens the 10 metres for the attacking team but it also takes 2 defenders out of the play, so how does that benefit the defending team in any way?

Yep,that is one of my bugbears, in fact the major one.
As @Michael Clare wrote, Inglis could do his goanna impersonation when tackled and no one batted an eyelid.
Every now and then a ref will make the call to stop and go back to the mark but that's generally when the ball carrier is "doing a dance" with two tacklers but never when he's crawled past or diagonally to the marker.
This is where we've been killed in the past two weeks, especially v the Panthers, the ref was calling us to get off practically as the tackle was completed or while they were still moving forward on the ground.
I mentioned it last week, why is something like stepping/crawling past the mark either ignored or a " go back and play it" but a lazy not playing the ball with your foot ( very) randomly penalised with a handover?

To me one is trying to gain an advantage ( every tackle) whereas the other is somewhat lazy.

For a game that wants to go the nth degree in some plays like inside/outside shoulder, knock ons, try/no try they ignore the major thing that dictates the rest.

 

[Brookie Bob]

After the panthers domination last week, it was obvious that calls seemed to fall their way-as did the amount of time players could spend slowing down the ruck.
below is an excerpt from Paul Crawley's column today:

DRAGONS FARCE EXPOSES BATTLING CLUBS’ ANGER

No wonder battling NRL clubs don’t think they get a fair go.

A week after Gold Coast coach Justin Holbrook took aim at the NRL for the Titans not getting an even crack when it comes to the 50/50 calls, it was well and truly exposed at Kogarah again on Friday night.

And St George Illawarra has every right to be filthy.

Privately, the Dragons have been told over the weekend that they were on the wrong side of several crucial calls during their 20-16 loss to the premiers.

And the first half sin binning of Jaydn Su’A wasn’t the only contentious call that went against them.

The Dragons were also told Zac Lomax should not have been sin binned when he took a player off the ball because it was not a genuine try scoring situation.

While if Ben Hunt would have stayed down after late contact he could have also milked a sin binning.

Throw in the fact the Panthers got three set restarts but the Dragons just one, when it was clear to all watching the game the Panthers were getting away with blue murder at the ruck.

But let’s go back to the Su’a sin binning because that is the call that was ultimately match-defining.

The hit on Panthers playmaker Sean O’Sullivan was not late. It was not even high.

And it should not have been a penalty, let alone a sin bin.

Yet because O’Sullivan stayed down Su’A was marched.

It was a disgraceful call.
here is the link to the rest of it:

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/nrl-tackle-round-2-teams-fume-over-referee-inconsistencies-jaydn-sua-sin-bin/news-story/7e36b9b17f7452ffcdaa807754bb1ec0

Basically above is what I was saying after the Panthers game.

Some folk said that 'no, the Panthers earned more favorable ruck conditions through their line speed / tackle dominance / attack speed' - and the referees had no influence'.

Looks like there is some school of thought to the contrary - the Panthers next opponent after Manly - St George - thought that Penrith were, in the words of the journalist above, 'getting away with blue murder at the ruck.'

Subjective versus objective - thus has it ever been.

 

[Supreme Leader]

Planting conspiracy theories! Do the refs get instruction on whom each week they will hit with 6 again's / penalties. I wonder sometimes because each week the result seems lop sided at the crucial point of the game.

 

[Snake]

There's no way systematic cheating and fixing of results could take place at NRL HQ and filter its way down to the refereeing ranks. The number of people involved and the variables would mean that sooner or later it would get out and the game would be brought to its knees...it would require a large number of people to be in cahoots and all it would take is one whistle-blower and the game would be destroyed. No way would they risk that. The money involved would see people in jail.

 

[XV-1]

Seriously, what a waste of a thread.

Just because an organisation is inept, does not mean they are corrupt

 

[EOL now nesting on the GC]

Seriously, what a waste of a thread.

Just because an organisation is inept, does not mean they are corrupt

Most threads on here could fall into the category of a complete waste to be fair.

 

[globaleagle]

 

[47MVEagle]

I don't think its a case of organised corruption within the NRL, more a case of favouritism towards certain teams on the day combined with ref ineptness.

How many times do we see/hear a home crowd complaining loudly, trying to get a penalty for their team & the refs eventually giving one 1 or 2 tackles later?

Likewise, one of the top teams on a roll & being allowed to step off the mark to play the ball or play it messily & not be pulled up for it?

The inconsistency in applying the profesional foul/10 in the bin rule when defending teams deliberately foul to slow down the play the ball is another - some refs warn after 2 penalties that the next one is in the bin, other refs send off at the first one, while others just continue to penalise with no further action - is this another area that's up to the ref's discretion?