LIVE GAME Round 26 v Raiders

[gregjm87]

@gregjm87 what's your take on the officiating in today's game?

Id love you to take a look at once incident in around the 8th minute when the referee decided to penalise the tigers for holding big papa down...

How does that tackle differ to rest of the tackles that weren't penalised during the game?

Was at my clubs finals all yesterday, missed the game. So can't comment on officiating as a whole sorry mate.
I did look at a replay of the tackle in question however.
Papallii wins the collision. Spins out of the contact pushes forward and finds his front. He is in a position to get up and play the ball but Twal is holding him down, not allowing him to do so. Now Twal isnt holding him much longer than most other tackles but he is required to release earlier since Papallii has won the collision.
Compare this to say the Tapine tackle just after. Tapine eventually gets to his front by beating our wrestle. But the hit up itself, no-one won the collision. He hasn't earnt the right for a quick play the ball. Hence his appeals to the ref after the tackle were ignored.
If I get a chance to watch the game I might timestamp a few more tackles more similar to Papalliis but not sure I'll get the chance this weekend.

 

[Tcat]

I reckon it’ll be Raiders v Storm GF

Storm to win

Roosters v Raiders. Raiders win.

 

[liltiger]

There was nothing wrong with Latu’s tackle for mine , but yeah def ill disciplined for sure

We were grubby no doubt, though the Raiders were no better. It's not that we get pinged for it that bothers me personally it's that there's no consistency. Ino we have a bad reputation with the officials. It's not just one it's heaps of them, they talk to eachother it's human nature. It's something we need to fix internally over time. Imo once we change our perception with the officials the games will be refereed to a more consistent standard.

 

[IronFist]

Was at my clubs finals all yesterday, missed the game. So can't comment on officiating as a whole sorry mate.
I did look at a replay of the tackle in question however.
Papallii wins the collision. Spins out of the contact pushes forward and finds his front. He is in a position to get up and play the ball but Twal is holding him down, not allowing him to do so. Now Twal isnt holding him much longer than most other tackles but he is required to release earlier since Papallii has won the collision.
Compare this to say the Tapine tackle just after. Tapine eventually gets to his front by beating our wrestle. But the hit up itself, no-one won the collision. He hasn't earnt the right for a quick play the ball. Hence his appeals to the ref after the tackle were ignored.
If I get a chance to watch the game I might timestamp a few more tackles more similar to Papalliis but not sure I'll get the chance this weekend.

It's plainly obvious in this case fans don't understand what constitutes gaining a bit more time in the ruck, and what doesn't. Every single tackle is a contest between ball carrier and tackler. The ball carrier attempts to win the collision, poke their nose through two defenders and immediately find their front when they come to ground. If they achieve this, they've won the tackle and defenders cannot slow the play the ball by holding down.

The defenders win with contact if they stop the ball carrier making metres in the collision, attempt to hold the player up, bring them to ground on their back, or turn them 'east-west' (or even south-north if they can achieve it). That's a dominant tackle and they've earned the right to slow the play the ball. Penrith are so freakin' good at this and is a big reason for their dominance over their premiership years.

So for a poster to ignore the context of the tackle when they question why Twal gets penalised but Canberra 'do the same thing', but get away with it, just highlights how much fans don't know about the game they claim to know so much about.

Every second post in this thread during the game is about a ref's decision. It's embarrassing.

The game has been ruined by prominent commentators and the media in general who question officiating decisions every single game. This club's supporters continually play the victim, but referees officiate what they see. On one hand, supporters lament how poor the team's contact and ruck control is, and on the other they harp on about poor treatment from the referees. The reason Wests don't get the same treatment as the good teams is because they are not as good as those teams at winning the ruck! It's been an issue for seasons now, and until the club recruits a couple of aggressive forwards (either tall or with leg speed), and a big focus in training is put on winning the collision in every tackle and controlling the ruck, Wests will continue to be second best in most games.

 

[gregjm87]

It's plainly obvious in this case fans don't understand what constitutes gaining a bit more time in the ruck, and what doesn't. Every single tackle is a contest between ball carrier and tackler. The ball carrier attempts to win the collision, poke their nose through two defenders and immediately find their front when they come to ground. If they achieve this, they've won the tackle and defenders cannot slow the play the ball by holding down.

The defenders win with contact if they stop the ball carrier making metres in the collision, attempt to hold the player up, bring them to ground on their back, or turn them 'east-west' (or even south-north if they can achieve it). That's a dominant tackle and they've earned the right to slow the play the ball. Penrith are so freakin' good at this and is a big reason for their dominance over their premiership years.

So for a poster to ignore the context of the tackle when they question why Twal gets penalised but Canberra 'do the same thing', but get away with it, just highlights how much fans don't know about the game they claim to know so much about.

Every second post in this thread during the game is about a ref's decision. It's embarrassing.

The game has been ruined by prominent commentators and the media in general who question officiating decisions every single game. This club's supporters continually play the victim, but referees officiate what they see. On one hand, supporters lament how poor the team's contact and ruck control is, and on the other they harp on about poor treatment from the referees. The reason Wests don't get the same treatment as the good teams is because they are not as good as those teams at winning the ruck! It's been an issue for seasons now, and until the club recruits a couple of aggressive forwards (either tall or with leg speed), and a big focus in training is put on winning the collision in every tackle and controlling the ruck, Wests will continue to be second best in most games.

This is extremely well said. I agree with all of it.
I don't claim to be an expert in the rules but I do try to take in as much as possible, have done my qualifications and help out with a whistle locally when needed. I am also fortunate enough to be able to pick the brain of a couple professional refs from time to time. So I do believe I have a better take on officiating than most.

Yet, I too am astounded at the lack of understanding of the finer points of the game. Especially with regards to the ruck as it is the biggest part of the game with every tackle it's own contest as you explain

For the most part I don't interact with the forum during games anymore because as you say every second post is about refereeing. It's more frustrating when the decisions they are complaining about are perfectly legitimate. Once these gripes evolve to accusation of corruption (and literally happens every week on here) it becomes nonsensical.

In fairness to the poster who posed me the question. He seems to be genuinely wanting to learn how and why refs see things differently to the average punter.

 

[innsaneink]

@gregjm87
Can you explain the disruptor please
Im old school and haven't kept up to date with these new rules they come out with every season.
I think im good with escorts... pretty self explanatory... running chasers off competing for a kick

 

[tigerballs]

It's plainly obvious in this case fans don't understand what constitutes gaining a bit more time in the ruck, and what doesn't. Every single tackle is a contest between ball carrier and tackler. The ball carrier attempts to win the collision, poke their nose through two defenders and immediately find their front when they come to ground. If they achieve this, they've won the tackle and defenders cannot slow the play the ball by holding down.

The defenders win with contact if they stop the ball carrier making metres in the collision, attempt to hold the player up, bring them to ground on their back, or turn them 'east-west' (or even south-north if they can achieve it). That's a dominant tackle and they've earned the right to slow the play the ball. Penrith are so freakin' good at this and is a big reason for their dominance over their premiership years.

So for a poster to ignore the context of the tackle when they question why Twal gets penalised but Canberra 'do the same thing', but get away with it, just highlights how much fans don't know about the game they claim to know so much about.

Every second post in this thread during the game is about a ref's decision. It's embarrassing.

The game has been ruined by prominent commentators and the media in general who question officiating decisions every single game. This club's supporters continually play the victim, but referees officiate what they see. On one hand, supporters lament how poor the team's contact and ruck control is, and on the other they harp on about poor treatment from the referees. The reason Wests don't get the same treatment as the good teams is because they are not as good as those teams at winning the ruck! It's been an issue for seasons now, and until the club recruits a couple of aggressive forwards (either tall or with leg speed), and a big focus in training is put on winning the collision in every tackle and controlling the ruck, Wests will continue to be second best in most games.

So, your explanation of the dominance in the tackle...where is that in the rules?

 

[gregjm87]

@gregjm87
Can you explain the disruptor please
Im old school and haven't kept up to date with these new rules they come out with every season.
I think im good with escorts... pretty self explanatory... running chasers off competing for a kick

It's a relatively new rule. But has to meet 2 criterias.
-The referee must believe there was no genuine attempt from the chaser to compete for the ball.
- The chaser must in some way interfere with the catchers attempt at catching the ball. Usually you only see contact between the chaser and catcher penalised but essentially something like waving your hand in front of them can be penalized also

Often a chaser will blatantly interfere with the catcher but is considered attempting to compete for the ball so play on. Important to note The refs are not asked to judge the quality of their competing for the ball but if they were genuinely attempting to do so.

As said earlier was out yesterday so haven't seen any of what I was reading were contentious disrupted calls/no calls whatever it was.

 

[Siberian Kitten]

The officiating was inconsistent. How many penalties did Canberra give away in the second half? Apparently, they were perfect ...

 

[Telltails]

It's plainly obvious in this case fans don't understand what constitutes gaining a bit more time in the ruck, and what doesn't. Every single tackle is a contest between ball carrier and tackler. The ball carrier attempts to win the collision, poke their nose through two defenders and immediately find their front when they come to ground. If they achieve this, they've won the tackle and defenders cannot slow the play the ball by holding down.

The defenders win with contact if they stop the ball carrier making metres in the collision, attempt to hold the player up, bring them to ground on their back, or turn them 'east-west' (or even south-north if they can achieve it). That's a dominant tackle and they've earned the right to slow the play the ball. Penrith are so freakin' good at this and is a big reason for their dominance over their premiership years.

So for a poster to ignore the context of the tackle when they question why Twal gets penalised but Canberra 'do the same thing', but get away with it, just highlights how much fans don't know about the game they claim to know so much about.

Every second post in this thread during the game is about a ref's decision. It's embarrassing.

The game has been ruined by prominent commentators and the media in general who question officiating decisions every single game. This club's supporters continually play the victim, but referees officiate what they see. On one hand, supporters lament how poor the team's contact and ruck control is, and on the other they harp on about poor treatment from the referees. The reason Wests don't get the same treatment as the good teams is because they are not as good as those teams at winning the ruck! It's been an issue for seasons now, and until the club recruits a couple of aggressive forwards (either tall or with leg speed), and a big focus in training is put on winning the collision in every tackle and controlling the ruck, Wests will continue to be second best in most games.

I am yet to see a supporter group that doesn't blame the referees for decisions that go against them and plenty of coaches do too - it's just when you are winning it's less of an issue.
This is not unique to WTs fans. Plenty of teams break the rules to also try and get an advantage and are considered smart for getting away with it. I applaud them for trying to rattle Canberra yesterday it kept us in the game - against on paper what looked like a superior pack - and frustrated the hell out of their very one eyed supporter group and their coach.
Prefer to try and limit their ability to roll through us by fledging the rules and stay in the game even if it risks getting penalized.

 

[Tucker]

It's plainly obvious in this case fans don't understand what constitutes gaining a bit more time in the ruck, and what doesn't. Every single tackle is a contest between ball carrier and tackler. The ball carrier attempts to win the collision, poke their nose through two defenders and immediately find their front when they come to ground. If they achieve this, they've won the tackle and defenders cannot slow the play the ball by holding down.

The defenders win with contact if they stop the ball carrier making metres in the collision, attempt to hold the player up, bring them to ground on their back, or turn them 'east-west' (or even south-north if they can achieve it). That's a dominant tackle and they've earned the right to slow the play the ball. Penrith are so freakin' good at this and is a big reason for their dominance over their premiership years.

So for a poster to ignore the context of the tackle when they question why Twal gets penalised but Canberra 'do the same thing', but get away with it, just highlights how much fans don't know about the game they claim to know so much about.

Every second post in this thread during the game is about a ref's decision. It's embarrassing.

The game has been ruined by prominent commentators and the media in general who question officiating decisions every single game. This club's supporters continually play the victim, but referees officiate what they see. On one hand, supporters lament how poor the team's contact and ruck control is, and on the other they harp on about poor treatment from the referees. The reason Wests don't get the same treatment as the good teams is because they are not as good as those teams at winning the ruck! It's been an issue for seasons now, and until the club recruits a couple of aggressive forwards (either tall or with leg speed), and a big focus in training is put on winning the collision in every tackle and controlling the ruck, Wests will continue to be second best in most games.

Well said, I’ve been banging on about this for years.
The victim mentality culture of this clubs supporters is an embarrassment.
Freddy said it last weekend…”Wests Tigers fans could boo for their country”. As a fan I was getting the shits with that Leichhardt crowd as they were so god damned negative. There was no where near enough chanting or supporting to get behind their team, just booing everything. It comes across as not understanding the game. A lack of rugby league IQ. A woe is me mindset that surely influences brain explosions from the playing group.
I was at the game in Canberra yesterday. There was a small supporters bay for our mob in the southern end….maybe 500 strong?
There were times during the game when their boos were drowning out the celebrations from a sold out crowd full of Raiders fans who were happily celebrating their minor premiership winning team.
It seems in built.

 

[gallagher]

Roosters v Raiders. Raiders win.

After a 6 to go

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Well said, I’ve been banging on about this for years.
The victim mentality culture of this clubs supporters is an embarrassment.
Freddy said it last weekend…”Wests Tigers fans could boo for their country”. As a fan I was getting the shits with that Leichhardt crowd as they were so god damned negative. There was no where near enough chanting or supporting to get behind their team, just booing everything. It comes across as not understanding the game. A lack of rugby league IQ. A woe is me mindset that surely influences brain explosions from the playing group.
I was at the game in Canberra yesterday. There was a small supporters bay for our mob in the southern end….maybe 500 strong?
There were times during the game when their boos were drowning out the celebrations from a sold out crowd full of Raiders fans who were happily celebrating their minor premiership winning team.
It seems in built.

I was reading the Kennel after the Dogs got beat by the Storm, and they almost collectively agreed that the ref had handed them the game on a silver platter. Was a real eye opener. Wouldn’t see that kind of honesty on here in a million years. There were calls for the police to investigate yesterday’s game FFS.

 

[Tucker]

I am yet to see a supporter group that doesn't blame the referees for decisions that go against them and plenty of coaches do too - it's just when you are winning it's less of an issue.
This is not unique to WTs fans. Plenty of teams break the rules to also try and get an advantage and are considered smart for getting away with it. I applaud them for trying to rattle Canberra yesterday it kept us in the game - against on paper what looked like a superior pack - and frustrated the hell out of their very one eyed supporter group and their coach.
Prefer to try and limit their ability to roll through us by fledging the rules and stay in the game even if it risks getting penalized.

You are wrong. Our club are gold medalists at it and far exceed others.
I agree that the tactic was smart as slowing their roll on would reduce scoring opportunities but from some reason, we just can’t do it subtly enough to get by. It was blatantly obvious to the point that it ruined the spectacle a bit.

 

[Tucker]

I was reading the Kennel after the Dogs got beat by the Storm, and they almost collectively agreed that the ref had handed them the game on a silver platter. Was a real eye opener. Wouldn’t see that kind of honesty on here in a million years. There were calls for the police to investigate yesterday’s game FFS.

Really?
That is a new level of butthurt 🤣

 

[mtd#2]

Was at my clubs finals all yesterday, missed the game. So can't comment on officiating as a whole sorry mate.
I did look at a replay of the tackle in question however.
Papallii wins the collision. Spins out of the contact pushes forward and finds his front. He is in a position to get up and play the ball but Twal is holding him down, not allowing him to do so. Now Twal isnt holding him much longer than most other tackles but he is required to release earlier since Papallii has won the collision.
Compare this to say the Tapine tackle just after. Tapine eventually gets to his front by beating our wrestle. But the hit up itself, no-one won the collision. He hasn't earnt the right for a quick play the ball. Hence his appeals to the ref after the tackle were ignored.
If I get a chance to watch the game I might timestamp a few more tackles more similar to Papalliis but not sure I'll get the chance this weekend.

Thanks for the breakdown...

Somewhere along the line, Ive lost track with the way the game is officiated around the ruck regarding the wrestle, so I appreciate the insights..

 

[mtd#2]

It's plainly obvious in this case fans don't understand what constitutes gaining a bit more time in the ruck, and what doesn't. Every single tackle is a contest between ball carrier and tackler. The ball carrier attempts to win the collision, poke their nose through two defenders and immediately find their front when they come to ground. If they achieve this, they've won the tackle and defenders cannot slow the play the ball by holding down.

The defenders win with contact if they stop the ball carrier making metres in the collision, attempt to hold the player up, bring them to ground on their back, or turn them 'east-west' (or even south-north if they can achieve it). That's a dominant tackle and they've earned the right to slow the play the ball. Penrith are so freakin' good at this and is a big reason for their dominance over their premiership years.

So for a poster to ignore the context of the tackle when they question why Twal gets penalised but Canberra 'do the same thing', but get away with it, just highlights how much fans don't know about the game they claim to know so much about.

Every second post in this thread during the game is about a ref's decision. It's embarrassing.

The game has been ruined by prominent commentators and the media in general who question officiating decisions every single game. This club's supporters continually play the victim, but referees officiate what they see. On one hand, supporters lament how poor the team's contact and ruck control is, and on the other they harp on about poor treatment from the referees. The reason Wests don't get the same treatment as the good teams is because they are not as good as those teams at winning the ruck! It's been an issue for seasons now, and until the club recruits a couple of aggressive forwards (either tall or with leg speed), and a big focus in training is put on winning the collision in every tackle and controlling the ruck, Wests will continue to be second best in most games.

I am questioning this particular one because I know Greig can provide a breakdown. I've played the game and followed it for god knows how long and I don't understand the rules in the ruck these days.. so a bit of education isn't a bad thing

I come from a time where we'd be rewarded for tackling around the legs . You could hold on longer and not be penalised...

The games changed alot since then..

I see a tackle as either dominant or not.. I don't think it should be more complicated than that - because that's where the ambiguity comes into it..

The amount of time I see flops and third man in that aren't penalised, but then that one against Papa is penalised - it creates alot of confusion..

Are flops/3rd man in, no longer something they penalise?

 

[Squater]

Thanks for the breakdown...

Somewhere along the line, Ive lost track with the way the game is officiated around the ruck regarding the wrestle, so I appreciate the insights..

Thanks everyone for clearing that up. Here i was thinking the referring was one sided. And nitpicking only one side. Wow what a dickhead I am. Obviously didn't know what I was looking at. Maybe next I won't comment until the better minds do so I can agree with them. 😀

 

[TigerNeddyK]

Well said, I’ve been banging on about this for years.
The victim mentality culture of this clubs supporters is an embarrassment.
Freddy said it last weekend…”Wests Tigers fans could boo for their country”. As a fan I was getting the shits with that Leichhardt crowd as they were so god damned negative. There was no where near enough chanting or supporting to get behind their team, just booing everything. It comes across as not understanding the game. A lack of rugby league IQ. A woe is me mindset that surely influences brain explosions from the playing group.
I was at the game in Canberra yesterday. There was a small supporters bay for our mob in the southern end….maybe 500 strong?
There were times during the game when their boos were drowning out the celebrations from a sold out crowd full of Raiders fans who were happily celebrating their minor premiership winning team.
It seems in built.

Tigers fans are just more passionate and knowledgeable

 

[TigerNeddyK]

Thanks everyone for clearing that up. Here i was thinking the referring was one sided. And nitpicking only one side. Wow what a dickhead I am. Obviously didn't know what I was looking at. Maybe next I won't comment until the better minds do so I can agree with them. 😀

Nah mate .. he definitely gave Canberra the rub , same as the blind fool in th bunker with the idiotic disruotor bS