Proof the game is being manipulated!!

[StuBoot]

The 'six again' call was meant to replace giving a penalty. I'd like to see the stats comparing the number of six agains 2021 vs number of penalties 2019. Its obvious the referees in 2021 are calling 'six again' where previously in 2019 they would not have given a penalty.

Especially the ones on the first tackle.

Also takes away an avenue for a captains challenge as opposed to a penalty.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Not likely , All Anussley will do is complain about whinging journos all the false stories they tell and so n so the story goes

And whinging Coaches ( such as on Monday this week).

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Especially the ones on the first tackle.

Also takes away an avenue for a captains challenge as opposed to a penalty.

Good point that one !!

 

[KOMORI]

The powers that be have screwed the game. Never before has there been such a glaring gap between the handful of good sides and those making up the numbers.

Never before have the referees been so central to a game. Funny that.

There was a time when you could make up that gap in pure talent with fitness and heart… but the way the game is now a team gets gassed early by lack of possession and never really recovers, and good teams keep the foot on the throat these days (case in point; our game versus the Feels last week was won in the first 15 minutes with 10 points and 90% possession).

It simply doesn’t matter how fit you are or how hard you try, fresher legs will always win a game that relies on speed and cardio to be competitive…. Sometimes heart just isn’t enough sadly…

 

[Will on the hill]

Just draw the line at halfway. Infringement inside 50 = Penalty, infringement outside 50 = set restart with option of penalty goal.

 

[MadMarcus]

There have been even up penalties for years. This is just more of the same theme.

 

[eagleron]

There have been even up penalties for years. This is just more of the same theme.

Only much more I'd say

 

[Ranga]

Yep, they tried a mass crackdown a couple of years ago and it was ended because there was a media outcry against the massive penalty counts resulting in stop start footy.

Wrong! The NRL said at the time that the number of penalties decreased after the crack down because “players got the message” and recalibrated (*cough).

Of course I am joking. But it was the same play book PVL used when saying that players are now tackling lower because of the crackdown, hence the decline in the number of penalties and sin bins for high contact. The NRL are marking their own homework...

I am thinking that this time the NRL should just come out and say that they have clinical data to show that NRL players are naughty when their team goes up by more than 3 converted tries.

 

[Supreme Leader]

Dear Mr Annesley, can u explain this please

You will need to wait for his Monday Wrap

 

[Tragic Eagle]

Wrong! The NRL said at the time that the number of penalties decreased after the crack down because “players got the message” and recalibrated (*cough).

Of course I am joking. But it was the same play book PVL used when saying that players are now tackling lower because of the crackdown, hence the decline in the number of penalties and sin bins for high contact. The NRL are marking their own homework...

I am thinking that this time the NRL should just come out and say that they have clinical data to show that NRL players are naughty when their team goes up by more than 3 converted tries.

The NRL marking their own homework is an excellent analogy. They have made unresearched, unconsultative, rash and mid season rule changes. That is extremely poor management and leadership. Add that the the inconsistency of our referees (who shouldn’t be interpreting the rules but simply applying them), the MRC and the judiciary, and you have absolutely no transparency or consistency. And the response we get from them including Annaseed is that the criticism is unjustified. How stupid do they think we are?

 

[The Indian]

The vast majority of restarts are on the first and 2nd tackles and that to me is the bigger stat in the game.

I think you'd find that the Storm would lead the way in this area in terms of intentionally giving them away early. Some set restarts ( let's call them the Jared Maria Hargreaves style from a couple of weeks back where he was sin binned ) aren't harmful at all, in fact they actually help your team by slowing the play with the meaningless 1 tackle extra.

I think the number of the tackle in the set in which the restart is generally conceded tells you all you need to know about how this rule is being manipulated. And these stats are damning.

 

[MissKate]

Why do none of the journos ask the questions that we would all like answered. Maybe because annesley is so monotone and painfully boring in his presentations that the journo are half asleep and too brain numbed to ask a question

 

[StuBoot]

The vast majority of restarts are on the first and 2nd tackles and that to me is the bigger stat in the game.

I think you'd find that the Storm would lead the way in this area in terms of intentionally giving them away early. Some set restarts ( let's call them the Jared Maria Hargreaves style from a couple of weeks back where he was sin binned ) aren't harmful at all, in fact they actually help your team by slowing the play with the meaningless 1 tackle extra.

I think the number of the tackle in the set in which the restart is generally conceded tells you all you need to know about how this rule is being manipulated. And these stats are damning.

It’s like Ricketson saying the Roosters are the most penalised team.
Doesn’t factor in that maybe they gave away penalties intentionally to manage the game.

 

[Ranga]

Why do none of the journos ask the questions that we would all like answered. Maybe because annesley is so monotone and painfully boring in his presentations that the journo are half asleep and too brain numbed to ask a question

I think it is because they don't want to be cut off from sources. The previous person in charge (He Who Shall Not Be Named) was a classic at rewarding the journos who wrote favourably with 'scoops' while shutting out those journos who asked questions.

It still happens and it is why guys like Hooper carry on like they have drunk the Kool Aide - they are either (a) just lazy and want an easy story, which the brass at the NRL can give them or (b) just so giddy that they can be around people in relative power. Probably both.

 

[The Who]

Imagine how much fun we'd have if the Captain's Challenge allowed six-agains to be scrutinised? We'd have to issue the Vidiots with slide rules.
Let's face it, the Captain's Challenge is so restrictive it is near toothless. It can't challenge a forward pass. It can't challenge an infringement the play before a try was scored. It can't challenge six-agains. . . .
But Teddy has shown you can challenge illegalities in a tackle. I wonder if this will become a trend?

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Imagine how much fun we'd have if the Captain's Challenge allowed six-agains to be scrutinised? We'd have to issue the Vidiots with slide rules.
Let's face it, the Captain's Challenge is so restrictive it is near toothless. It can't challenge a forward pass. It can't challenge an infringement the play before a try was scored. It can't challenge six-agains. . . .
But Teddy has shown you can challenge illegalities in a tackle. I wonder if this will become a trend?

In reality you should be able to challenge any decision.

And I think it should be one per half not one per game.

 

[eaglebuzz]

Ah for a game when the penalty count is 3-2 and no six agains !!

That’s where you’ll see “ game of the season “

I want to agree but you have to consider teams like Melbourne who deliberately infringe to kill the other side's momentum in attack. They aren't penalised anywhere near enough.

 

[Supreme Leader]

Have you guys noticed the better teams are actually lying in the ruck and then attempt to roll in to the opposite direction to where their defensive line is on, so then the dummy half can only through to that side? given there is only one side he can pass to.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

I want to agree but you have to consider teams like Melbourne who deliberately infringe to kill the other side's momentum in attack. They aren't penalised anywhere near enough.

My fix for that

First infringement, penalty.

Second infringement, penalty and march the opposition 20 metres upfield.

Third infringement, 10 in the bin for the one , two or three players involved.

Fourth infringement, send off for the one , two , three players involved.

Now, how many times would Melbourne roll the dice ????

 

[Ranga]

I’d think about going a bit radical…

Each team has 4 penalties they can give - like fouls in NBA. The fifth penalty mandates 10 in the bin, but the player comes back on if the opposition scores. Once a player is sent to the bin, the team gets their quota of 4 penalties back.

Ref can still send a player to the bin for a professional foul, but they come back on after (if) a try is scored.

For foul play, it would be a straight 10 in the bin - doesn’t matter if the other team scores.

The issue with the above is that it requires someone to count.