Mandatory sin bin

[BAGNF05]

I think the ref erred in the way he explained that sinbin.
To me it was quite simple really…the opposition was a high chance of scoring and that was being spoiled by consistent, back to back ruck infringements that were clearly intended to slow them down and break their roll on. That is a professional foul.
He didn’t need the explanation he gave…it has confused people and provided an avenue to whinge.

He said Crystal clear, “three ruck infringements in a set is a mandatory sin bin”. Nobody I know after a lifetime around the game was aware of the rule.

You don’t need to be a conspiracy theorist to get the shits with our treatment by officials.

I get mates and family members who support other teams messaging me after recent games to say they thought we were dudded.

 

[gregjm87]

what is the pay scale for Refs. State Cup would be chump change imo against an NRL full time gig , flying around.Are Reserve grade Refs basically used in their local area, apart from semi's etc or moved around the state ,I'm ashamed to say that is something I've never looked into when studying the game a few decades ago

I'll ask next time I see them but yes it would be comparatively chump change but they do travel around a bit (not heaps).

 

[Snidest 0]

He wasn't, or at least he didn't do the same thing 3 times.

I went back and watched the replay. There was a 6-again against one of the forwards, then Luai was involved in a small scuffle with Bateman where Bateman pushes him after the tackle and Luai pushes back to the head, then the next set Luai is penalised and sent for working the tackle. There's 1 official and 2 potential infringements specifically by Luai.

But also how ridiculous a proposition - you can be binned for 3 types of the same infringement, but you are fine if they are 3 different types of things? So if I do a head-high THEN lay on the ruck THEN do an escort I stay on the field, but if I lay in the ruck 3 times I go to the bin.

enough said

 

[gregjm87]

Yeah just watched it. Wasn’t late, wasn’t high, wasn’t dangerous, maybe he was vulnerable, but I’m not sure he had even kicked the ball on contact.

Anyone remember Mick Gillette who played for Balmain? He would have a field day with this. He always used to fake kick 😂

Not dangerous in my opinion but is in accordance to what that video deems dangerous.
As lame as it is the only option appears to be grab and hold.

 

[innsaneink]

Not dangerous in my opinion but is in accordance to what that video deems dangerous.
As lame as it is the only option appears to be grab and hold.

Have a look at Damien Cooks tackle on Trindall in tonights game abour 21 mins in first half

 

[ezybro]

2 straight six agains and a penalty by dragons on there line no sin bin🤔

 

[Speed2burn]

2 straight six agains and a penalty by dragons on there line no sin bin🤔

That’s the 2nd time in this match alone it’s happened

 

[innsaneink]

Atkins has his eyes painted on.....that kick off was fine...and he was right in line with it

 

[gregjm87]

Have a look at Damien Cooks tackle on Trindall in tonights game abour 21 mins in first half

Was at training, sorry mate. Missed the first half. Will have a quick look either later tonight or some time tomorrow.

 

[Flippedy]

Was at training, sorry mate. Missed the first half. Will have a quick look either later tonight or some time tomorrow.

Channel 9 commentary just highlighted it, said it was identical to Luai’s but this time no penalty, no sin bin, nothing - as it should be. Too bad for us eh?

 

[Betterdays22]

So I've since talked to some of my ref mates about this. They reckon Annesley is right and the clubs have explicitly been told what is and isn't acceptable.

They sent me this link as their supporting evidence.

Tackling the kicker - The dos and don'ts

NRL head of football elite competitions Graham Annesley outlines what constitutes illegal contact on a kicking player

www.nrl.com

Edit* I should note they also aren't happy they have to rule that way and believe the protection of kickers has gone to far. Their opinion was if you don't want to stand deep (giving your side advantage with on sides and kick metres you deserve to get whacked).

There's a clip going around of Cook and Trindall last night which was nearly identical and was not penalised. Was Luai's tackle by the letter of the law a penalty? probably. Should it of been penalised based on precedent? no.

 

[gregjm87]

There's a clip going around of Cook and Trindall last night which was nearly identical and was not penalised. Was Luai's tackle by the letter of the law a penalty? probably. Should it of been penalised based on precedent? no.

My opinion is they are not dangerous tackles and should not be penalised. Based on what Annesley has told us this week and previously they should both have been penalties.
As for precedent I think there is enough examples each way that you could argue a precedent has been set either side. Having spent 5 minutes googling similar tackles I'd suggest there are more examples of similar tackles being a penalty than not. Although I guess the penalised ones are the ones that show up on a google search so perhaps this is skewed.
Kurt Donahue 3 weeks ago on Sexton the most recent example.
As for those saying the calls always go against us one of the first to pop up on my search was Kurt Capewell being penalized for a much softer tackle on on Latu Fainu last year.

Whilst we would all like to see consistent calls, and that is no doubt the goal of referees, I'd suggest just like any other rule refs will sometimes miss things as well as they will have different opinions on where the lines that distinguish late from not late and dangerous from not dangerous.

Do I still think it was a tough call against Laui, yes. Do I think it was an egregious penalty where we have been unfairly hard done by, no.

 

[Betterdays22]

My opinion is they are not dangerous tackles and should not be penalised. Based on what Annesley has told us this week and previously they should both have been penalties.
As for precedent I think there is enough examples each way that you could argue a precedent has been set either side. Having spent 5 minutes googling similar tackles I'd suggest there are more examples of similar tackles being a penalty than not.
Kurt Donahue 2 weeks ago on Sexton the most recent example.
As for those saying the calls always go against us one of the first to pop up on my search was Kurt Capewell being penalized for a much earlier, much softer tackle on on Latu Fainu last year.
Whilst we would all like to see consistent calls, and that is no doubt the goal of referees, I'd suggest just like any other rule refs will sometimes miss things and will have different opinions on where the lines that distinguish late from not late and dangerous from not dangerous.
Do I still think it was a tough call, against yes. Do I think it was an egregious penalty where we have been unfairly hard done by, no.

I agree. It's just interesting that Annesley would come out and say it was definitely a penalty and then an identical one be deemed not a penalty 3 days later.

I've said previously I think the perception that we are consistently on the end of dud calls is because a) we are simply less disciplined that other sides b) we have been physically and technically inferior to most other sides and c) there is a total lack of ability to defend a penalty/error. Refereeing decisions are magnified for the Tigers because we lose so much, and 50-50 calls often become match defining.

 

[gregjm87]

I agree. It's just interesting that Annesley would come out and say it was definitely a penalty and then an identical one be deemed not a penalty 3 days later.

I've said previously I think the perception that we are consistently on the end of dud calls is because a) we are simply less disciplined that other sides b) we have been physically and technically inferior to most other sides and c) there is a total lack of ability to defend a penalty/error. Refereeing decisions are magnified for the Tigers because we lose so much, and 50-50 calls often become match defining.

I agree with all here. I'd suggest that Atkins and whoever was on the line last night will get a talking to when they do their video work next week.

 

[Lestronge]

I agree. It's just interesting that Annesley would come out and say it was definitely a penalty and then an identical one be deemed not a penalty 3 days later.

I've said previously I think the perception that we are consistently on the end of dud calls is because a) we are simply less disciplined that other sides b) we have been physically and technically inferior to most other sides and c) there is a total lack of ability to defend a penalty/error. Refereeing decisions are magnified for the Tigers because we lose so much, and 50-50 calls often become match defining.

Richo nailed it in his BTH interview today . The refs are front runners and referee that way ie. the perception is the better teams are better disciplined. Which in reality is arbitrary nonsense .
You just gotta grind your way out of the bottom of the table and create your own luck .
I would love to know how high we have to go to get off the shit list .
Some of the decisions in last nights game against the sharks were beyond head scratching . I’m assuming something changed , as they eventually won . Or did the dragons play that badly ?
For me I don’t know why they can’t just ref whatever is in front of them . Dudes lying the ruck , count to 3 in your head give a penalty . Dude smashes someone , let them yahoo and carry on for 5-10 seconds . Dudes got his hands on the ball , and the player is trying to play the ball penalty . Dude has his hands on the ball but it’s mid tackle, and they’re dominating the tackle , not a penalty.
And so on and so on …. The jersey your wearing should have nothing to do with anything .. It’s litterally a mandate from the nrl that you can’t let the bottom clubs stifle the product that the top clubs are producing .
Lol which is dumb because we’ve just gotten through years of the least entertaining , rigid teams are the ones winning premierships . It’s hardly a who’s who of each years entertainers , winning all the trophy’s . Think about it ? Melbourne , into the yuck to watch bulldogs from des , into more Melbourne , with a sprinkling of decent to watch roosters , into 4 years of Penrith grinding teams into the ground ….. all of those teams were/are notorious for shenanigans around the ruck . Yet how many of them copped all the penalties ? The concept that refs need to manage outcomes of games is a stupid one , that was brought in 10 years ago with little to no proof that is has any value . And now everyone across the nrl is over it . They’re just ruining matches now .
how everyone had just accepted an obvious bias as “oh wells be better” is some Freudian level gaslighting ….. anyways .

 

[Betterdays22]

Richo nailed it in his BTH interview today . The refs are front runners and referee that way ie. the perception is the better teams are better disciplined. Which in reality is arbitrary nonsense .
You just gotta grind your way out of the bottom of the table and create your own luck .
I would love to know how high we have to go to get off the shit list .
Some of the decisions in last nights game against the sharks were beyond head scratching . I’m assuming something changed , as they eventually won . Or did the dragons play that badly ?
For me I don’t know why they can’t just ref whatever is in front of them . Dudes lying the ruck , count to 3 in your head give a penalty . Dude smashes someone , let them yahoo and carry on for 5-10 seconds . Dudes got his hands on the ball , and the player is trying to play the ball penalty . Dude has his hands on the ball but it’s mid tackle, and they’re dominating the tackle , not a penalty.
And so on and so on …. The jersey your wearing should have nothing to do with anything ..
how everyone had just accepted an obvious bias as “oh wells be better” is some Freudian level gaslighting ….. anyways .

The truth is somewhere in between mate. You cannot deny Tigers have been poorly drilled and disciplined over the years. They have also lacked resilience when things have not gone their way. They simply have to be better.

Maybe the referees are part of some self-fulfilling prophecy caused by our incompetence which is disadvantaging the Tigers. Maybe, but i'm not really convinced. No one has provided any real evidence beyond the odd howler that we are systematically being refereed differently to other teams. Regardless, does whinging about it change anything? probably not.

 

[Lestronge]

The truth is somewhere in between mate. You cannot deny Tigers have been poorly drilled and disciplined over the years. They have also lacked resilience when things have not gone their way. They simply have to be better.

Maybe the referees are part of some self-fulfilling prophecy caused by our incompetence which is disadvantaging the Tigers. Maybe, but i'm not really convinced. No one has provided any real evidence beyond the odd howler that we are systematically being refereed differently to other teams. Regardless, does whinging about it change anything? probably not.

I agree mate . We’ve been badly disciplined especially a few years ago when we had BJ Leilua running around … but it’s up to an official , judge , adjudicator , referee whatever position it is … to be able to rise above and treat every case individually .
And the referees under the Sutton regime , have lost sight of this , in the pursuit of the ideal of putting on the best product .
Think about it like this … if you go into every game with just this one basic idea “ team A is the best team , and team b is the worst team , any 50/50 decisions that I’m not sure about I’m going to lean towards team a” is that then still an actual 50/50 decision anymore ? Because IMO by its very nature of the fact you’ve already predetermined an outcome at that percentage point , that it’s no longer 50/50 , but rather 💯 in the favour of team A. So now just to get a fair shake , what percentage does team b need to hit to get a Decision go thier way ? Is it 60? Is it 70% ? 55?
What number does team B need to hit for them to break free of the already unconscious/ or even conscious bias there .
And that’s the problem . It should be 0. At worst your odds should be 50/50. At no point should you think that decision that is far more favourable to an outcome in your way , is going to go the other way .
Which is my whole point . And why this leaning towards the strong teams as basis point is extremely bias . Because now team B has to almost have the absolute obvious decisions are the only ones they’re gonna get . Which is why there’s soo many howlers . Because refs have predetermined outcomes in thier mind . Whether it be from video , previous matches , experiences , fans in thier DMs .. whatever .
And that’s the stuff I’m arguing about . Because the refs have openly admitted , and everyone treats it as an unwritten rule . Be a good team and get the rub … right ?
No .. the maths doesn’t add up … it’s really be a good team and we will be bias towards you .. and that’s bullshit …

 

[TheClaws]

We seem to get touch judge calls more often than some other teams, both Luai penalties were the touch judge, is there a school of thought where perhaps touch judges are emboldened to step up and make calls against the lower teams as the consequences are not as significant? Unfortunately, there is not a stat that shows which officials called the penalty...that would be interesting reading. We also seem to get pinged for forward passes more frequently, when you see the top teams throwing blatant ones and getting away with it.

I'm not saying there is a conspiracy from the refs... just natural human behaviour.

 

[crazycat]

Honestly... I am glad to see more binning, it just sucks that we are targetted.

Post game judiciary does NOTHING. We loose 2 points, they loose a player for a few weeks. So what!

We need a 5 minute bin. 10 minutes can mean a try and the game...
We also don't capitalise on this when it happens, yet fall victim sometimes when it happens to us....


Ref Targetting... Don't know what to do about that one. We do field a younger team, but usually not grubby players. Stuffed to know why we would be targetted.

 

[Rock Hopper Steve]

We seem to get touch judge calls more often than some other teams, both Luai penalties were the touch judge, is there a school of thought where perhaps touch judges are emboldened to step up and make calls against the lower teams as the consequences are not as significant? Unfortunately, there is not a stat that shows which officials called the penalty...that would be interesting reading. We also seem to get pinged for forward passes more frequently, when you see the top teams throwing blatant ones and getting away with it.

I'm not saying there is a conspiracy from the refs... just natural human behaviour.

The Broncs at home get away with a stack of forward passes leading to tries and most of them come from their backline breaks where the Bengal lances can't keep up with the pace.

Another area where they occur is attacking the tryline near the posts in any game.

Wonder if hawkeye technology in tennis could be introduced somehow, it shows ball trajectory, this could determine if the ball is thrown backwards or forwards out of the hands.