"Manly push boundaries. Parramatta are disciplined"

[Snoz1976]

So the shot on jakes chin and the hands on the ball after the tackle is complete are now within the rules - interesting ?

 

[Fibro Eagle]

Not related to Manly but relevant JWH blowing up cause he gets targeted yes he is ill disciplined but refs will make a different call on him compared to another player it’s called bias and it happens and it happens with teams as we all can see watching Manly

 

[Michael Clare]

Every club pushes boundaries - including Manly. And Parramatta.

Suggesting that Parramatta do not push boundaries insults the intelligence of everyone, bar Eels supporters.

Unconscious bias and conscious bias both exist; Analsley's comments strongly suggest the latter, and he should be publicly censured by the NRL. Which of course won't happen, as they have their own set of biased agendas, both conscious and unconscious.

I'm sick of Manly being painted as some sort of plot-necessity pantomime villain that only exists in the NRL (according to some, especially certain media) purely to play the 'bad guy' or 'dark side' that their 'pride of the league' needs to be seen to overcome on a weekly basis.

A good versus evil narrative, a soap opera in colored clothes.......all we're missing now is a sitcom laugh track when a Manly player makes a mistake. Boos and hisses when Manly score. "Good for the game", they say. Rugby League's doing great when ____________ (insert the media / NRL's favourite darlings this year, usually Rooster, Bunnies, Eels, Broncos, Storm - now Panfers etc) are winning, they say.

Never Manly. Never, ever Manly.

Looks like we're back to the whole 'rub of the green' discussion again.

It does make me wonder if some players have been reluctant to sign with Manly in the past - or present, often knowing that it's harder to win at Manly - and they want to get winning bonuses, and advance their careers.

Am I suggesting that there may be an organized agenda against our club? Not really.
But I am suggesting that we've not been the 'favorites' with the game's hierarchy since the Super League days, and other clubs have have been periodically given a leg up.

The NRL (and Media, who run the NRL to an extent) do appear to want us - as a punching bag. Suits their narrative.

This is one of the best comments I've ever read on this forum. Well done.

 

[Waz13]

Like Jake we are refereed differently from some clubs because we have form.

And because we have form we are always bad and the others are always good.

Not my words but you can bet that’s what NRL HQ think !!

As much as I loved Jake giving Cummins an absolute gob full on Friday night when they were laying all over us, it didn’t get us a penalty. in fact seemed like the exact opposite. The more we carry on at the ref, the less chance we get the calls. This won’t change. Perhaps we need too, because with Tom out we need every ounce of ref help we can get.

 

[Michael Clare]

I see penalties at times are earned by teams more so who show urgency, as an example I often see Manly players not showing enough urgency to play the ball and in fact, look sluggish to get to feet and play it....I think recently Tui, Koula, Garrick and Tom have really lifted in this area and the frustrating thing, the refs have maybe blown 1 or 2 penalties to Manly where there could have been another 30....it's the consistent 1 sided decisions that seem to be awarded to the opposition and let's be real, there's some dumb penalties Keppie, Jake and Marty give away that are obvious and hard to bitch about, but why none back the other way, I mean it's a little coincidental these opposition sides who have their own problem players, who give away penalties for fun, suddenly become perfect when they play against Manly ?
Just 1 last rant....when we do get a penalty or 6 again call, it's always early in the tackle count, whereas the opposition like Eels Friday seem to get them tackle 5 or 6 at the most opportunist moments and critical times.
I love my footy, but must confess I love it a little less after games like Friday, not a fan of excuses and realise Manly are far from perfect in many factors including discipline, but I think it's fair to say the other 15 teams are far from perfect also, yet against Manly it's so 1 sided and when Manly are beaten by the better team which is basically any Top 4 side the past few years....I can wear it.
But to lose to the officials, is the most frustrating thing to cop and pretty over it, don't want favours, just a fair chop.

I sometimes watch part of matches using a steady "three-count" (as in wrestling) of tackles during matches to try a) amuse myself and b) to keep a somewhat objective view of holding down. If players are still on a player after a steady "three count," you can be reasonably confident that the tackled player has been held down too long and a penalty is appropriate. I can assure you that Manly are not, judging by this simple criteria, any slower getting off tackled players than any other side.

 

[silvertail]

So sad that we have not got any media support. From start to finish, the game felt manufactured to get the desired result. No integrity. No accountability. No decent explanation or introspection.

 

[ALinda]

Those words make my blood boil and then

The Great Apologist did say they hadn't reviewed the match penalties yet, but would do so....
Then nothing.

this beggars belief. What sort of a match review is that if the penalties haven't been reviewed. Even if they do review them, I bet nothing's said.
Too little way too late

 

[Rackets]

Every story has a villain and that just happens to be Manly. The NRL and the muppets who call themselves officials will always punish us and swing games in favour of the opposition. It is and always will be everyone hates Manly...and yes we hate them too. No matter how disciplined we play the scum officials will always find a way to screw us. In the past we've been Cechined, Hayned and now Cumminsed. No matter what though we'll do what we've been doing always better than anyone else and that is keep winning through adversity. It's what makes Manly Manly and the envy of every other club.
Manly Forever

 

[StuBoot]

Not related to Manly but relevant JWH blowing up cause he gets targeted yes he is ill disciplined but refs will make a different call on him compared to another player it’s called bias and it happens and it happens with teams as we all can see watching Manly

Spot on, we could all understand his frustration the other night - a lazy arm that glanced the face of a player charging through to score deemed an 8 point try is farcical.
The player wasn't hurt, didn't seem overly bothered by it nor did his teammates yet the ref puts him on report also.
Those type of things happen every game yet he got singled out, why?

 

[globaleagle]

Spot on, we could all understand his frustration the other night - a lazy arm that glanced the face of a player charging through to score deemed an 8 point try is farcical.
The player wasn't hurt, didn't seem overly bothered by it nor did his teammates yet the ref puts him on report also.
Those type of things happen every game yet he got singled out, why?

Maybe he should've slid in with his "studs up" like a retired player who never got penalised for it.

 

[MadMarcus]

I think most people who have watched more than 3 or 4 games understand the key to success is pushing the boundaries in the ruck but not getting pinged.

Any team who is coached to actually get off the tackled player as quickly as possible will get trounced every week.

The problem is when the “boundaries” are set at different places for different teams.

This happens when morons in charge of the game say things like 1 team pushes the boundaries and another one doesn’t.

 

[Ralphie]

I have lost interest in Rugby League. It started in earnest after the 2013 GF. I travelled the world to watch the Eagles play & now I don't watch at all. The best I can muster is to casually check the results every now and then. The NRL has destroyed the game I played for 15 years & followed for over 50 years.

 

[Budgie]

He claims that the Tui tackle was a penalty. He didn’t hit Perham high. It was around the shoulders. However Perham dropped like a sack of ****, so Tui’s chest made contact with the head, but that was after the initial contact and is unavoidable due to the laws of physics. Tui is moving forward that quickly, whatever drops from under him is going be brushed by his upper body...it’s not high contact.

Like many I’m over it. Games decided by referees and six agains that are completely subjective and a subservient media who are completely without gumption. Surely with the Tuipulotu tackle someone should have asked ‘what can any player do in such a situation to avoid contact with the head?’ The player has to try to make the tackle because the whole point of the game is to prevent the opposition scoring. He launches at a perfect speed and angle and the opposition player ducks. What is the defensive player to do? Can he see a problem with that rule?

 

[eagle66]

The 6 again has taken place of the scrum penalties of years ago. Loose arm, 2nd row feed, collapsing the scrum got you a shot at goal....for some teams. Other teams got there penalties outside of kicking range. Who knows what the ref sees and who he favours.

 

[globaleagle]

Surely with the Tuipulotu tackle someone should have asked ‘what can any player do in such a situation to avoid contact with the head?’ The player has to try to make the tackle because the whole point of the game is to prevent the opposition scoring. He launches at a perfect speed and angle and the opposition player ducks. What is the defensive player to do? Can he see a problem with that rule?

I believe he indicated that there was no question of any wrong doing by Tuipulotu. (the camera even shows Christian going in low and not even looking at the player) but GA said that even though it was accidental, it's a hit to the head and all hits to the head are penalised.

(Now I'm quite sure we see a lot of contact to the head let go in games as refs deem them incidental).

So it was a bit like 'ice' hockey. Rule used to be "No matter what, even it is absolutely an accident, if your hockey stick comes into contact with an opponents head, it's a 2 min penalty. If it draws blood, it's a 4 min penalty.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out the the nrl have made their line in the sand that at the very least, high contact = a penalty, regardless of what the tackled player does (slips, etc)


- Now we all know about lines in the sand.... they get washed away at the next high tide...!


edit: I am not G. Annesley!

 

[globaleagle]

I sometimes watch part of matches using a steady "three-count" (as in wrestling) of tackles during matches to try a) amuse myself and b) to keep a somewhat objective view of holding down. If players are still on a player after a steady "three count," you can be reasonably confident that the tackled player has been held down too long and a penalty is appropriate. I can assure you that Manly are not, judging by this simple criteria, any slower getting off tackled players than any other side.

I remember a women's soccer game in the olympics (usa v canada) and the GK gets 10 seconds to kick the ball.

A usa player stood near the ref saying 1..2...3...4...whatever comes after 4...6...

And when she got to 11, the ref blew the whistle.

Maybe Manly should follow your lead and have a designated 'number counter' to let the ref know.

(I can imagine Toovey doing that, then getting told to shut it). lol

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Maybe Manly should follow your lead and have a designated 'number counter' to let the ref know.

(I can imagine Toovey doing that, then getting told to shut it). lol

Interested to know how this is coached, or are players just expected to 'get the feel' of when they'd better get off the tackled player? Such a grey area in the game. Aloia makes a brilliant legs tackle as Jake is racing in as second man but because Aloia dropped the bloke so quickly Jake was penalised for a flop! The lack of reward for low one-on-one tackles is a black mark on the game.

Also with offside penalties, wonder if teams have a player designated to set the line, or if they all just have to guess where the 10 is, and when they can start racing up on the ball-carrier? Because TV usually shows a close shot of the ptb it's hard to judge if the offside penalties are legit or not (including the ones that are not blown!)

 

[globaleagle]

Interested to know how this is coached, or are players just expected to 'get the feel' of when they'd better get off the tackled player? Such a grey area in the game. Aloia makes a brilliant legs tackle as Jake is racing in as second man but because Aloia dropped the bloke so quickly Jake was penalised for a flop! The lack of reward for low one-on-one tackles is a black mark on the game.

Also with offside penalties, wonder if teams have a player designated to set the line, or if they all just have to guess where the 10 is, and when they can start racing up on the ball-carrier? Because TV usually shows a close shot of the ptb it's hard to judge if the offside penalties are legit or not (including the ones that are not blown!)

That flop penalty was just as you described, and it was ridiculous. the guy went down so fast jake almost tripped and fell on him. I think cummings yelled something like 'second man in flop' or something but it was a bad call. (no kidding).

My 'guess' is players hear the ref call held, then get up - then the players decide how much they want to test the ref.

I also guess that the players just try and back in line with the ref, then see how early they can take off when he's not looking their way. But these are just cynical guesses.

 

[Budgie]

I believe he indicated that there was no question of any wrong doing by Tuipulotu. (the camera even shows Christian going in low and not even looking at the player) but GA said that even though it was accidental, it's a hit to the head and all hits to the head are penalised.

(Now I'm quite sure we see a lot of contact to the head let go in games as refs deem them incidental).

So it was a bit like 'ice' hockey. Rule used to be "No matter what, even it is absolutely an accident, if your hockey stick comes into contact with an opponents head, it's a 2 min penalty. If it draws blood, it's a 4 min penalty.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing out the the nrl have made their line in the sand that at the very least, high contact = a penalty, regardless of what the tackled player does (slips, etc)


- Now we all know about lines in the sand.... they get washed away at the next high tide...!


edit: I am not G. Annesley!

Like, laugh, thank you ... couldn't decide! At least it's clear now. When we need a penalty (often) we get one of our players, probably the one voted Silvertails Dill of The Week (this week, Keppie I believe) to grab the ball and duck into the arm of an opposing player. Hit to the head. Penalty!!!!
Rinse and repeat.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Not even sure why I mention this but Marty did get away with a high hit to RCG right at the end there, Cummins must have been unsighted otherwise he would've probably marched him