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

[voicefromthehill]

"If Jake's not there we would know today if Tom goes through that hole or not" - Annesley

Graham Annesley discusses the bunkers reasoning for disallowing Toluta'u Koula's try in defeat to the Eels in Round 3

www.nrl.com

It is an 11 minute video - the guy is trying to hide the ineptitude or corruption of the game

And wow just wow - they applaud the Panthers try. That was on the line, corrupt

 

[ricardo]

It is an 11 minute video - the guy is trying to hide the ineptitude or corruption of the game

Bore us to death so we give up really hahaha

 

[voicefromthehill]

I can't believe the NRL allowed this rubbish to be presented

It is like me trying to explain why I didn't get home in the next hour after telling my missus I would after a day on the drink

The guy is wearing a nappy and has filled it completely - of course it won't get challenged in the media

 

[Jerry1]

Basically he said put black jersey's on instead of maroon & it's a try.

 

[Eagle thru 'n' thru]

Watching the replay, it seems Jake stops just short of the defensive line, and Moretti moves towards Jake (and is responsible for contact) all the while the ball is moving in the opposite direction.

 

[MissKate]

It is an 11 minute video - the guy is trying to hide the ineptitude or corruption of the game

And wow just wow - they applaud the Panthers try. That was on the line, corrupt

11mins is a short version for him, he usually prattles on for 30-45mins. He could wrap these reports up in 5-10mins max. He is well past it, god knows how much he gets paid by the nrl but whatever it is it is way too much

 

[eaglebuzz]

Watching the replay, it seems Jake stops just short of the defensive line, and Moretti moves towards Jake (and is responsible for contact) all the while the ball is moving in the opposite direction.

Yeah that's the part that frustrated me, but Jake should have just taken the extra three steps forward to take it out of the bunker's hands. Those are the little things we need to be doing so that their "discretion" can't even enter into it.

 

[frank stokes]

I won’t be popular but I actually accept Annersleys explanation on this one… up to Jake to finish his run instead of stopping and ball watching… no obstruction if he does not stop in the line…
Moretti played it up, of course he did but he’s not the first and won’t be the last…

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

I won’t be popular but I actually accept Annersleys explanation on this one… up to Jake to finish his run instead of stopping and ball watching… no obstruction if he does not stop in the line…
Moretti played it up, of course he did but he’s not the first and won’t be the last…

Agree, frank. But I'll be f***ed if I'm going to spend 11 minutes of my life listening to Annesley explain what you just explained in 15 seconds.

 

[The Royal Soup]

"If Jake's not there we would know today if Tom goes through that hole or not" - Annesley

Graham Annesley discusses the bunkers reasoning for disallowing Toluta'u Koula's try in defeat to the Eels in Round 3

www.nrl.com

the guy is an absolute stooge and clown blowing his own trumpet! Complete and utter muppet

 

[Eagle thru 'n' thru]

Yeah that's the part that frustrated me, but Jake should have just taken the extra three steps forward to take it out of the bunker's hands. Those are the little things we need to be doing so that their "discretion" can't even enter into it.

I 100% agree. And since when has Jurbo been used as a decoy runner? Maybe he should perfect the art of a decoy. He'll get it right next.

 

[StuBoot]

Yeah that's the part that frustrated me, but Jake should have just taken the extra three steps forward to take it out of the bunker's hands. Those are the little things we need to be doing so that their "discretion" can't even enter into it.

True, but the problem is say, Jake takes those extra three steps, albeit slowly and Moretti slides with him also.
Is he still deemed to be in the defensive line even though it's staggered.
It could be argued that he had stopped at the point of contact by Moretti also, again a staggered line.

Surely they can come up some indicators like who initiated the contact, how forceful, proximity to the ball, how many passes or time from initial contact?

Moretti initiated the contact in my opinion, wasn't knocked off his feet and had ample time to disengage from Jake and try to fill that space.

The irony is if that's a kick through the line and Jake is onside of course then Moretti could be penalised for interfering with the chaser but they'd look at Jake's proximity to the ball and likelihood of getting anywhere near it and most likely say...play on.

 

[The Who]

True, but the problem is say, Jake takes those extra three steps, albeit slowly and Moretti slides with him also.
Is he still deemed to be in the defensive line even though it's staggered.
It could be argued that he had stopped at the point of contact by Moretti also, again a staggered line.

Surely they can come up some indicators like who initiated the contact, how forceful, proximity to the ball, how many passes or time from initial contact?

Moretti initiated the contact in my opinion, wasn't knocked off his feet and had ample time to disengage from Jake and try to fill that space.

The irony is if that's a kick through the line and Jake is onside of course then Moretti could be penalised for interfering with the chaser but they'd look at Jake's proximity to the ball and likelihood of getting anywhere near it and most likely say...play on.

The above hypothesis underscores what is wrong with our sport. Video refereeing has become so technical you need to be a quantum physicist to work out if it is a try or not. Yet our eyes told us instantly that it was a great example of attacking football that should be applauded.
Our sport has gone backwards since it entrusted Bunker Boofheads to determine outcomes rather than trust our intuition and knowledge of the sport. It has killed the moment, and caused confusion and anger.

 

[Raven Mad Manly Fan]

The above hypothesis underscores what is wrong with our sport. Video refereeing has become so technical you need to be a quantum physicist to work out if it is a try or not. Yet our eyes told us instantly that it was a great example of attacking football that should be applauded.
Our sport has gone backwards since it entrusted Bunker Boofheads to determine outcomes rather than trust our intuition and knowledge of the sport. It has killed the moment, and caused confusion and anger.

100%

 

[danny-boy]

The game has changed and I’m sure all 17 teams have taken note of the video refs decision last Sunday.

It’s simple, if you are a decoy runner or have run past the play, do not linger anywhere near the defensive line. Get the **** out of there any which way you can. It gives the defence an opportunity to put themselves in a position to claim an obstruction without even attempting a tackle.

It’s opened up a can of worms though. Every coach is going to be training their players to make contact with decoy runners.

The NRL does this to themselves. They never learn.

 

[BOZO]

Let take this on an even playing field
Annesley gave his reasons for his refs performance
Time now for Seibold to give his reasons for his players 14 errors on the field that gifted the Eels 14 opportunities to win the game

 

[BOZO]

Looking for Excuses never improved anyone's game

 

[Super Manly Bros]

Watching the replay, it seems Jake stops just short of the defensive line, and Moretti moves towards Jake (and is responsible for contact) all the while the ball is moving in the opposite direction.

Exactly, he runs into Jake who stopped before the line and gives up on the play. Then slowly moves sideways when tommy is running through

 

[HK_Eagle]

Ok, now that I’ve had some time to cool my jets and reflect on the obstruction… I am actually ok with the decision (and it’s ongoing consistent interpretation).

IMO, whenever a lead runner takes out a defensive player, or stops in the defensive line, AND the player with the ball runs through that particular gap, then I agree it should be an automatic obstruction. As weak as Jake’s example was, it would still fall within this ruling (although I acknowledge there is some potential argument to say he stopped short of the line). The Panther example, which was shown by Annesley, would not qualify because the player with the ball did not run through the gap that involved the defensive player impeded.

Look, we all know that the Parra player was never going to get to Turbo. However, Jake did take the space that stopped the defensive player from moving across to attempt to defend that space. I think the concept is the right one. I could live with this rule applied consistently. As much as that non-try ruling stung. The onus would be on Jake in that situation to either pull up shorter or run through. That is something he could control, and I expect he and others will make an adjustment to ensure they never stop in the defensive line.

 

[nightster]

This is exactly the point.
If we are going to stop-frame every try to 'ensure' that our eyes are deceiving us then why not during the lead-up to the try? Why not the whole match? In fact, why have an on-field human ref at all? Let's just use a drone controlled by AI?
In fact, let's not even bother with human footballers. Let's just play video RL because getting everything 100% correct is what sport is about... isn't it?

Get ready for the stop start Americanised version of the game .... $$$$ to be made in the US of A ... of course it will no longer be RL as we Know and love