NRL admits bunker mistake

[TurnStyle]

I heard his interview on SEN. To paraphrase him, he mentioned that "all materials they asked for were provided to them by the NRL. We were worried that the Bunker asked the ref to check the obstruction but that was definitely not the case."

I think that provides me with a bit of reassurance. We got a half arse public apology and an assurance that what happened was wrong. They will review the rules at season's end. Case closed for me now.

Thanks very much for posting this @tig_prmz.

I'll take him by his word (he is a lawyer after all ... 😉) and choose not to use my own mind asking questions no one seems to be able to answer - or think important.

 

[BZN]

Just noticed that Friday’s early game has the dynamic duo back in action. Butler has the short and long whistle and Clown is back in the box.

You would actually think the NRL would want to try and get some cred back after the Cowboys farce .

Yep.....I reckon the NRL are spitting in our/WT face by selecting the Clown and Bugger-lugs so soon after the debacle they caused.

 

[The SHADOW]

I heard his interview on SEN. To paraphrase him, he mentioned that "all materials they asked for were provided to them by the NRL. We were worried that the Bunker asked the ref to check the obstruction but that was definitely not the case."

I think that provides me with a bit of reassurance. We got a half arse public apology and an assurance that what happened was wrong. They will review the rules at season's end. Case closed for me now.

Well said to @tig_prmz , we’ll said

 

[TheDaBoss]

If u send enough streakers onto the field that might get them to court

 

[hank37w]

Lee says they released it, so case closed detective.

. . . . . and you believe him after all the other bullshit chest beating and backing down he has done in the past which always ends up with him skulking away like a mongrel dog.

If the NRL released the audio, what did he say about it, what was in it?

Has it been forensically tested to check that it has not been altered or interfered with in any way?

Don't have to do too much detective work to come to the conclusion that it is highly likely that this has not occurred, considering the time frame we are talking about.

To me at least, if no one else, the audio was the key thing to go after, not the 2 points or arguing about when it was full time or any of Lee's other wanker bullshit.

The audio is the key to whether there may have been any corruption involved and there has to be suspicion aroused immediately when comments like Butler calling out, "NO ESCORT," prior to the kick off and then telling James Tamou that the off side had already been checked when in actual fact even if there was an escort, which has since been dismissed as an incorrect ruling, the off side kick off was actually the first and only rule that was broken in that set.

People can fob off the off side kick rule as not being meant to be interpreted in that manner but it cannot be argued that it is written in black and white in the rule book which is more than can be said about some of the made up rules and interpretations made by Annesley which are no where to be found in the rule book.

I'm far from being a detective but I would back my hunches and suspicions before anything Lee comes up with, especially after seeing some of the decisions and eventual back downs that he has been involved in.

 

[tigertragic]

. . . . . and you believe him after all the other bullshit chest beating and backing down he has done in the past which always ends up with him skulking away like a mongrel dog.

If the NRL released the audio, what did he say about it, what was in it?

Has it been forensically tested to check that it has not been altered or interfered with in any way?

Don't have to do too much detective work to come to the conclusion that it is highly likely that this has not occurred, considering the time frame we are talking about.

To me at least, if no one else, the audio was the key thing to go after, not the 2 points or arguing about when it was full time or any of Lee's other wanker bullshit.

The audio is the key to whether there may have been any corruption involved and there has to be suspicion aroused immediately when comments like Butler calling out, "NO ESCORT," prior to the kick off and then telling James Tamou that the off side had already been checked when in actual fact even if there was an escort, which has since been dismissed as an incorrect ruling, the off side kick off was actually the first and only rule that was broken in that set.

People can fob off the off side kick rule as not being meant to be interpreted in that manner but it cannot be argued that it is written in black and white in the rule book which is more than can be said about some of the made up rules and interpretations made by Annesley which are no where to be found in the rule book.

I'm far from being a detective but I would back my hunches and suspicions before anything Lee comes up with, especially after seeing some of the decisions and eventual back downs that he has been involved in.

Plus
No ‘real’ feedback on
-The offside kickoff
-The possible time keeping discrepancy

Just accept ‘robust discussion’

 

[Dennisspicer1]

Where exactly does Lee H say he did not get the materials he asked for, and what exactly did he ask for, do we know?

I'm sorry but some of you are off your meds with this stuff, chasing for audio tapes and claiming NRL are withholding information.

Do we really think Tigers would arrange all these meetings with the NRL, obtain senior legal advice, and then back down if the NRL failed to produce the required materials?

There are comments above, Lee himself went on the radio and acknowledged that the NRL provided the materials he asked for.

You are really a dodo, jerky, if the information asked for had been openly given, and Lee announces it on radio, Wouldn't you have thought they would have let everyone know EXACTLY what was said between referee & bunker, conversation not just hearsay from LEE,

On radio accepting what he was told.

IF YOU WANNA STAY IN THE NRL, THEN SHUTUP.

 

[jirskyr]

. . . . . and you believe him after all the other bullshit chest beating and backing down he has done in the past which always ends up with him skulking away like a mongrel dog.

If the NRL released the audio, what did he say about it, what was in it?

Has it been forensically tested to check that it has not been altered or interfered with in any way?

Don't have to do too much detective work to come to the conclusion that it is highly likely that this has not occurred, considering the time frame we are talking about.

To me at least, if no one else, the audio was the key thing to go after, not the 2 points or arguing about when it was full time or any of Lee's other wanker bullshit.

The audio is the key to whether there may have been any corruption involved and there has to be suspicion aroused immediately when comments like Butler calling out, "NO ESCORT," prior to the kick off and then telling James Tamou that the off side had already been checked when in actual fact even if there was an escort, which has since been dismissed as an incorrect ruling, the off side kick off was actually the first and only rule that was broken in that set.

People can fob off the off side kick rule as not being meant to be interpreted in that manner but it cannot be argued that it is written in black and white in the rule book which is more than can be said about some of the made up rules and interpretations made by Annesley which are no where to be found in the rule book.

I'm far from being a detective but I would back my hunches and suspicions before anything Lee comes up with, especially after seeing some of the decisions and eventual back downs that he has been involved in.

Forensically tested? Are you for real?

If you cannot accept the word of the man, Lee, then there's no hope for you while ever Lee is in some position of authority. Literally you cannot be helped if you are inclined to not believe anything Lee H ever says. It's all very Trumpian of you, all very "fake news" and "alternative facts".

The refs were wrong - they admitted it. The kickoff interpretation also probably wrong. They should have come to another conclusion, but they did not. It happens in NRL. It sucks that Tigers got one of the worst decisions ever.

But all that other stuff you are going on with - I'm sorry, that's conspiratorial to the point of being very unhealthy.

Forensically tested NRL audio? Good god. If your post was in fact some kind of ironic satire, then you got me good.

 

[jirskyr]

You are really a dodo, jerky, if the information asked for had been openly given, and Lee announces it on radio, Wouldn't you have thought they would have let everyone know EXACTLY what was said between referee & bunker, conversation not just hearsay from LEE,

On radio accepting what he was told.

IF YOU WANNA STAY IN THE NRL, THEN SHUTUP.

Why do they have to document in exquisite detail every minute piece of ever single evidence or conversation, in public?

In fact I would expect the NRL explicitly requested this did not occur, as part of the agreement reached with Tigers, to end the saga.

I am not aware of any time in history that the NRL has ever publicly released refereeing tapes that were not previously available to the broadcasters? Has there ever been a precedent for this?

As per my previous post, if the Tigers Chair himself acknowledges that NRL provided the requested evidence, and Tigers are satisfied that that evidence does not point to a bigger issue, and Tigers acknowledge this publicly (be it radio or in writing or whatever) - then what more do you expect?

Also it's not hearsay from Lee - he was present at the meeting with the NRL and he is recounting what materials were being provided to him. Hearsay is the testimony of someone on behalf of a third party, for example "Susan told me that Tom was in town".

 

[tig_prmz]

Say what you want about lawyers but from my experience they don't lie.

 

[hank37w]

Forensically tested? Are you for real?

If you cannot accept the word of the man, Lee, then there's no hope for you while ever Lee is in some position of authority. Literally you cannot be helped if you are inclined to not believe anything Lee H ever says. It's all very Trumpian of you, all very "fake news" and "alternative facts".

The refs were wrong - they admitted it. The kickoff interpretation also probably wrong. They should have come to another conclusion, but they did not. It happens in NRL. It sucks that Tigers got one of the worst decisions ever.

But all that other stuff you are going on with - I'm sorry, that's conspiratorial to the point of being very unhealthy.

Forensically tested NRL audio? Good god. If your post was in fact some kind of ironic satire, then you got me good.

Yeah, whatever ya reckon.

But I would say that what is really unhealthy is your faith and trust in Lee with his piss poor track record of going on with things.

 

[jirskyr]

Yeah, whatever ya reckon.

But I would say that what is really unhealthy is your faith and trust in Lee with his piss poor track record of going on with things.

You are confusing and conflating two different concepts: (1) believing in the ability of a person vs (2) accepting the testimony of that person.

Lacking in competence does not automatically make you a liar.

I accept that NRL provided the materials Tigers requested, that's it. I never expected Tigers to end up in court anyway. It has nothing specifically to do with Lee H except he was present at the meeting, and he is the Tigers spokesperson on this matter.

 

[Dennisspicer1]

Thanks very much for posting this @tig_prmz.

I'll take him by his word (he is a lawyer after all ... 😉) and choose not to use my own mind asking questions no one seems to be able to answer - or think important.

Why do they have to document in exquisite detail every minute piece of ever single evidence or conversation, in public?

In fact I would expect the NRL explicitly requested this did not occur, as part of the agreement reached with Tigers, to end the saga.

I am not aware of any time in history that the NRL has ever publicly released refereeing tapes that were not previously available to the broadcasters? Has there ever been a precedent for this?

As per my previous post, if the Tigers Chair himself acknowledges that NRL provided the requested evidence, and Tigers are satisfied that that evidence does not point to a bigger issue, and Tigers acknowledge this publicly (be it radio or in writing or whatever) - then what more do you expect?

Also it's not hearsay from Lee - he was present at the meeting with the NRL and he is recounting what materials were being provided to him. Hearsay is the testimony of someone on behalf of a third party, for example "Susan told me that Tom was in town".

For Christ sake, how many times have you got to hear it.

For the truth,
you and myself do not know for sure what that is here, and you keep making silly bloody statements like LEE is a lawyer and we must take his word for it, I once knew a lawyer,( nice guy ) until he turned into a bad one. For peace of mind, im sure an awfull lot of West Tiger supporters, and plenty of other clubs supporters would like to hear the tapes that were promised.

And one thing you and the NRL cant get away from is the statement the NRL made the day after the game was that they would provide the coversation tape between the referee & Bunker.

But you said the evidence doesnt matter, as we have Lee the Lawyer's word, see how far you get telling that to a Judge.

GOOD MORNING YOUR HONOUR, WE DID NOT BRING ANY EVIDENCE BECAUSE I AM A LAWYER AND MY WORD SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT.

 

[Dennisspicer1]

You are confusing and conflating two different concepts: (1) believing in the ability of a person vs (2) accepting the testimony of that person.

Lacking in competence does not automatically make you a liar.

I accept that NRL provided the materials Tigers requested, that's it. I never expected Tigers to end up in court anyway. It has nothing specifically to do with Lee H except he was present at the meeting, and he is the Tigers spokesperson on this matter.

I GIVE UP, NO MORE PLS.

 

[hank37w]

You are confusing and conflating two different concepts: (1) believing in the ability of a person vs (2) accepting the testimony of that person.

Lacking in competence does not automatically make you a liar.

I accept that NRL provided the materials Tigers requested, that's it. I never expected Tigers to end up in court anyway. It has nothing specifically to do with Lee H except he was present at the meeting, and he is the Tigers spokesperson on this matter.

Sorry mate but he has made a lot of noise and backed down as usual which makes me question his judgement and ability.

Having said that his testimony also needs to be questioned that he did in fact hear audio and see transcripts of the audio and that there was some sort of certainty and proof that the audio and transcripts had not been tampered with in any way.

You are entitled to accept whatever you like, however I am not as easily convinced because there are too many unanswered questions to convince me that there has not been a cover up.

 

[tiger_one]

Sorry mate but he has made a lot of noise and backed down as usual which makes me question his judgement and ability.

Having said that his testimony also needs to be questioned that he did in fact hear audio and see transcripts of the audio and that there was some sort of certainty and proof that the audio and transcripts had not been tampered with in any way.

You are entitled to accept whatever you like, however I am not as easily convinced because there are too many unanswered questions to convince me that there has not been a cover up.

Except there were others also at the meeting.
Are they all in some type of scam?
There were discussions and it has been sorted, to the agreement of both sides.

 

[Chicken_Faced_Killa]

Things are getting ridiculous in this conversation.

If there really was a conspiracy against the club to give the Cowboys the win why wait until the last play of the game to do it?

 

[tigertragic]

Pretty simple
There were 4 matters under discussion and raised by Lee H

1 The full time stop clock
2 The offside at the kickoff
3 The obstruction
4 The captains challenge

As far as I am aware

1 Lee has not provided any advice specifically either way on this matter
2 Lee has not provided any advice specifically either way on this matter
3 NRL admitted it got it wrong
4 NRL admitted ‘ambiguity’ in the rule that needs to be updated.
That means ‘it wasn’t’ permissible under the current rules but the NRL has needed to ‘interpret’ the rule to save further embarrassment.

It should be also noted that during the year players were infringing to give away a penalty just so they could lodge a challenge. The NRL came down with a threat of sin binning if the challenge failed.

No penalty in the tigers scenario but permissible 🤔

It’s all about transparency for the tigers supporters

Not unreasonable

 

[LARDS]

My guess is the NRL probably give them a carrot and a stick and told them to pull their heads in.
The NRL could certainly make like (more) difficult for the tigers if they wanted too.

 

[Dennisspicer1]

Pretty simple
There were 4 matters under discussion and raised by Lee H

1 The full time stop clock
2 The offside at the kickoff
3 The obstruction
4 The captains challenge

As far as I am aware

1 Lee has not provided any advice specifically either way on this matter
2 Lee has not provided any advice specifically either way on this matter
3 NRL admitted it got it wrong
4 NRL admitted ‘ambiguity’ in the rule that needs to be updated.
That means ‘it wasn’t’ permissible under the current rules but the NRL has needed to ‘interpret’ the rule to save further embarrassment.

It should be also noted that during the year players were infringing to give away a penalty just so they could lodge a challenge. The NRL came down with a threat of sin binning if the challenge failed.

No penalty in the tigers scenario but permissible 🤔

It’s all about transparency for the tigers supporters

Not unreasonable

I heard his interview on SEN. To paraphrase him, he mentioned that "all materials they asked for were provided to them by the NRL. We were worried that the Bunker asked the ref to check the obstruction but that was definitely not the case."

I think that provides me with a bit of reassurance. We got a half arse public apology and an assurance that what happened was wrong. They will review the rules at season's end. Case closed for me now.

Whats going on, all these peepholes accepting other peepholes word as the truth.

How about we will call what they have said when we can hear the tapes.

THAT WILL BE THE TIME AND THE ONLY TIME I WILL ACKNOWLEDGE IT AS THE TRUTH,
NOT HEARSAY ON OUR FORUM, FROM ANYBODY WITH NO TRUTH.