Pumped for tonight!
- Thread starter stryker
- Start date
tig_prmz
Well-known member
@stryker said:
whereas you should be proud of the refs, they did some really good work for youu
@innsaneink said:
Who said you did?
It's called humour… A bit tender are we?
Demonborger
New member
Lol if you can't see that rugby league has a terrible ruleset you're naive, the rules need to be rewritten so that the game can be adequately officiated, take the ruck for example, in theory a ref could penalise numerous infringements by both sides in almost every tackle - so why do they chose some and not others? There is no consistency.
Then we have a penalty, a kick for territory and another 6 possessions, in a game that has stripped almost every contest for the ball (play the ball, scrums, strips - are pretty much 99% guaranteed to favour the team in possession).
With such loopholes were run into issues such as betting scams and the like (i'm not suggesting this origin series has been affected) and the game is easy to manipulate by the governing body to get certain match ups for ratings (lets have game 2 origin won by the team who lost game 1, lets have a big rating team in the grandfinal over a little rating team, etc).
The game has improved a lot off the field and from a player perspective has improved on the field (taking key performance indicators to mind, not necessarily footballing skill) but the ruleset and officiating hasn't and is beginning to become more apparent to be a deficiency for the game as both entertainment and a contest.
This affects every level of professional rugby league and needs to be addressed.
In addition to this we have to acknowledge that the ruleset and interpretations of those rules by the officials has an impact upon what the product on the field is like.
Game needs to get together and find out what the fans want to see in rugby league games and reform the rules to focus upon increasing the entertaining aspects while making the game more black and white and taking the ref out of the equation as much as possible.
Then we have a penalty, a kick for territory and another 6 possessions, in a game that has stripped almost every contest for the ball (play the ball, scrums, strips - are pretty much 99% guaranteed to favour the team in possession).
With such loopholes were run into issues such as betting scams and the like (i'm not suggesting this origin series has been affected) and the game is easy to manipulate by the governing body to get certain match ups for ratings (lets have game 2 origin won by the team who lost game 1, lets have a big rating team in the grandfinal over a little rating team, etc).
The game has improved a lot off the field and from a player perspective has improved on the field (taking key performance indicators to mind, not necessarily footballing skill) but the ruleset and officiating hasn't and is beginning to become more apparent to be a deficiency for the game as both entertainment and a contest.
This affects every level of professional rugby league and needs to be addressed.
In addition to this we have to acknowledge that the ruleset and interpretations of those rules by the officials has an impact upon what the product on the field is like.
Game needs to get together and find out what the fans want to see in rugby league games and reform the rules to focus upon increasing the entertaining aspects while making the game more black and white and taking the ref out of the equation as much as possible.
innsaneink
Well-known member
@Cultured Bogan said:
Editing anothers quotes is generally a big no-no on most forums
Oh, it was humour? OK. Haha
tig_prmz
Well-known member
Referees co-coaches Stuart Raper and Bill Harrigan answer your most frequently asked questions from the State of Origin decider.
>
What is your official stance on the Justin Hodges try in the first-half, is it an obstruction?
>
In 2011 we added an important clause to the interpretations around obstruction plays.
>
The change was that: “If in the opinion of the referee or video referee the play had no effect on the scoring of a try then a try will be awarded.”
>
The reason for this change was that the obstruction rule had become so technical that tries were being disallowed when they shouldn’t have been.
>
There remain a number of indicators that referees should look for in determining if an obstruction has taken place but the over-riding one they must consider is whether a player actually had an effect on the try being scored.
>
In this case both video referees believed that Beau Scott wasn’t impeded by Ben Hannant’s decoy run and that Robbie Farah had minimal contact which did not alter the outcome.
>
Both video referees formed the view therefore that the player did not have an effect on the scoring of the try.
>
Having reviewed the footage today we support that position.
>
What were your thoughts on the decision to penalise NSW forward Tim Grant after it appeared Queensland winger Brent Tate had thrown a punch?
>
The initial incident was a high shot from Tim Grant on Brent Tate. That is where the matter started and that is why the penalty went against NSW.
>
What is your official stance on the Justin Hodges try in the first-half, is it an obstruction?
>
In 2011 we added an important clause to the interpretations around obstruction plays.
>
The change was that: “If in the opinion of the referee or video referee the play had no effect on the scoring of a try then a try will be awarded.”
>
The reason for this change was that the obstruction rule had become so technical that tries were being disallowed when they shouldn’t have been.
>
There remain a number of indicators that referees should look for in determining if an obstruction has taken place but the over-riding one they must consider is whether a player actually had an effect on the try being scored.
>
In this case both video referees believed that Beau Scott wasn’t impeded by Ben Hannant’s decoy run and that Robbie Farah had minimal contact which did not alter the outcome.
>
Both video referees formed the view therefore that the player did not have an effect on the scoring of the try.
>
Having reviewed the footage today we support that position.
>
What were your thoughts on the decision to penalise NSW forward Tim Grant after it appeared Queensland winger Brent Tate had thrown a punch?
>
The initial incident was a high shot from Tim Grant on Brent Tate. That is where the matter started and that is why the penalty went against NSW.
tig_prmz
Well-known member
the explanations are ridiculous.. he doesn't take into consideration that carney was put in a bad position as well.. AND no.. the ref said the penalty was for gallen punching first, that's why grant wasn't called for a talk with the ref, only gallen was.
also, the tate punch, cant believe it was only grade 1…
also, the tate punch, cant believe it was only grade 1…
Glen_McWilliams
New member
@stryker said:
So a knock from Tate and a skirmish with Gallen means "game on" to punch Bird who was pinned to the ground?
You're as bad as Tate if you want to justify that.
I have no issue with a couple of blokes going toe to toe but what Tate did is not on.
Glen_McWilliams
New member
@stryker said:
A minute and a half into the game? Short fuse.
"Game on" certainly sounds like you were comfortable with it and we are talking about the punch on Bird here.
Both teams continually attcaked the head for the entire game with grubby rubbish and it should have been stamped out at the beginning.
No I said game on to get up swinging. He had copped some dirty stuff and obviously his anger was at such a level that he did something stupid. It happens. It is not advised by me whatsoever to slam people when stationary on the ground. Thats how folkes end up dead and you in jail. I have seen it happen.
Glen_McWilliams
New member
You just said on another thread that this type of stuff "rightly or wrongly" is accepted because it is Origin.
So is it Tate that needs to be educated on what he should learn to accept without reacting in such a manner?
So is it Tate that needs to be educated on what he should learn to accept without reacting in such a manner?
Tiger_Watto
New member
@stryker said:
dont forget the kidney punches either… GRUBS!!!
