LIVE GAME Round 5 v Broncos

[gregjm87]

We have a situation where the current admin are not adequately training referees, the ref's today are robots with absolutely no ability to get a feel for a game or think on the go. They're told to tow the line and they just do. The standard of referring over the past decade has gone over a cliff. What has allowed that to happen, two things imo. First the inability to criticise a referee, don't care about people not wanting to ref in the future, no one is above criticism, players who perform poorly get criticised all the time, we don't worry about kids not wanting to play because they may face criticism. We're all adults, ref's should be made to do a press conference after every game to explain any dubious decisions they made, all the fans of every team deserve that transparency. The ref's are too isolated in cotton wool imo. The second problem with the state of refereeing is the big one for me, the N.R.L should relinquish any training rights or coaching, the N.R.L should just hand out the guidelines and rules for any season and the referees should be trained in an autonomous independant academy just for the referees. The N.R.L have gotten them to the point they're too scared to make a decision. I think independence for the referees would be perfect. There would be no bias in training and procedures.
I'd also scrap the bunker, it's absolutely useless, they're making mistakes anyway and the people looking at things 100 times are no better. But they wont because the first thing they did with the bunker, was turn it into an advertising hoarding to make money for the game.
I'd put the referees on blast with all the other coaches to show the N.R.L it's nowhere near good enough and things need to change massively, all the fines in the world and threats of suspensions mean nothing if everyone does it togeather.

There's a few things raised here but:

The NRL have created an environment where Refs have no feel for the game, tow the line and standards have dropped.
I tend to agree. But a lot of the complaints particularly feel for the game are around what constitutes a high tackles and the punishment for these actions. This is not the refs it is on the NRL and their fear of litigation. Yes refs are towing the line as a result but I'm not sure what the alternative truly is. Particularly when you look around what is happening to collision sports around the world, NRL is simply following the same path.
The forward passes not being called this week are another issue. Again I feel they are not performing well enough, but again I believe they will have identified this internally and aim to address it within their systems. Will it gets better? Maybe a little, probably not. Why? Imo the refs simply aren't good enough.

The inability to criticise the referee is the cause for the decline. I can't agree at all. There is no inability to criticise Referees. Referees are criticised in game by commentators, on field by players, post game by media and on line by social media. I'd ask how does the coach also pointing out their mistakes make them more accountable? Additionally, coaches are allowed to comment on specific referee decisions. They are not allowed to attack the referee personally or question their integrity.

Similarly how would a press conference with a ref saying oh, I can see on this footage here I [This word has been automatically removed]ed up. I actually thought this happened or I was unsighted and didn't see this help? It would only create further headlines bagging refs and further discontent amongst fans remembering all the times the ref got a call wrong against their side and fuel the he just hates us mentality.

As to the actual reasoning why a coach shouldn't; the creating of a refs fault culture filtering down and putting off future refs is a concern (even if it is not a concern for you). I have seen the struggles first hand of clubs struggling to get refs for their games. I know of a couple NSW cup refs who refuse NRL contracts because they don't want their kids getting harassed because they got a decision wrong. Secondly (and I know this is a bit soft and modern thinking) but both coaches and refs are employees of the NRL. Workplace laws mean you can't say much more than what you are allowed to say.

An independent training academy for referees may bring about better results. But I don't actually see how. They would still have the same guidelines as the NRL will be giving those guidelines to the independent academy.

The bunker isn't performing well enough. Agreed. Someone pointed out a shepherd in our game that the bunker should have seen amongst other contentious calls from the bunker. But it is a no win situation when the ref makes an error, 9/fox replay it 10 times and as many pundits who say scrap the bunker will be saying we have the technology to reverse this, why aren't we? Also if you can recall some of the stuff that was wrong pre bunker I think there are far more correct calls nowadays.

Perhaps I'm wrong but I just don't see how anything you've suggested results in better refereeing outcomes.

 

[liltiger]

There's a few things raised here but:

The NRL have created an environment where Refs have no feel for the game, tow the line and standards have dropped.
I tend to agree. But a lot of the complaints particularly feel for the game are around what constitutes a high tackles and the punishment for these actions. This is not the refs it is on the NRL and their fear of litigation. Yes refs are towing the line as a result but I'm not sure what the alternative truly is. Particularly when you look around what is happening to collision sports around the world, NRL is simply following the same path.
The forward passes not being called this week are another issue. Again I feel they are not performing well enough, but again I believe they will have identified this internally and aim to address it within their systems. Will it gets better? Maybe a little, probably not. Why? Imo the refs simply aren't good enough.

The inability to criticise the referee is the cause for the decline. I can't agree at all. There is no inability to criticise Referees. Referees are criticised in game by commentators, on field by players, post game by media and on line by social media. I'd ask how does the coach also pointing out their mistakes make them more accountable? Additionally, coaches are allowed to comment on specific referee decisions. They are not allowed to attack the referee personally or question their integrity.

Similarly how would a press conference with a ref saying oh, I can see on this footage here I [This word has been automatically removed]ed up. I actually thought this happened or I was unsighted and didn't see this help? It would only create further headlines bagging refs and further discontent amongst fans remembering all the times the ref got a call wrong against their side and fuel the he just hates us mentality.

As to the actual reasoning why a coach shouldn't; the creating of a refs fault culture filtering down and putting off future refs is a concern (even if it is not a concern for you). I have seen the struggles first hand of clubs struggling to get refs for their games. I know of a couple NSW cup refs who refuse NRL contracts because they don't want their kids getting harassed because they got a decision wrong. Secondly (and I know this is a bit soft and modern thinking) but both coaches and refs are employees of the NRL. Workplace laws mean you can't say much more than what you are allowed to say.

An independent training academy for referees may bring about better results. But I don't actually see how. They would still have the same guidelines as the NRL will be giving those guidelines to the independent academy.

The bunker isn't performing well enough. Agreed. Someone pointed out a shepherd in our game that the bunker should have seen amongst other contentious calls from the bunker. But it is a no win situation when the ref makes an error, 9/fox replay it 10 times and as many pundits who say scrap the bunker will be saying we have the technology to reverse this, why aren't we? Also if you can recall some of the stuff that was wrong pre bunker I think there are far more correct calls nowadays.

Perhaps I'm wrong but I just don't see how anything you've suggested results in better refereeing outcomes.

You make some good points, though I think separating the refereeing from the N.R.L in an autonomous, independant structure would help referees out of sight. The mixed messaging and micro management from the N.R.L is a massive part of the reason for the decline. If the referees were trained independently from the N.R.L in some way it would remove the constant pressure put upon them by head office. If we had independant referees, how it would be set up iv no idea I'm just summizing, I think once they're free of the N.R.L micromanagement we would see referees similar to the ones we had in the 90s, where they all worked within the guidelines, all pretty much had a good feel for the game, could think on the go. I just think the ref's we have running around now are that scared of getting things wrong, they've become robots, add to that the bunker scrutinising everything to the nth degree they're petrified of making a call cause they don't Want to make mistakes, the decline on the refereeing is purely on the N.R.L. Under Velandys and Abdo with the commission they've steered the game more toward what's palatable for t.v and the corporates. I get that because we need the money to keep it going, but it's coming at the cost of the fanbase, I know people I used to go to games with religiously a few years back that don't give the N.R.L a second thought anymore cause they're now crazy about the A.F.L. I can't do it, like everyone here I'm a Tiger till I die, but I can understand why they would walk away from the game, the fans are frustrated.

 

[gregjm87]

You make some good points, though I think separating the refereeing from the N.R.L in an autonomous, independant structure would help referees out of sight. The mixed messaging and micro management from the N.R.L is a massive part of the reason for the decline. If the referees were trained independently from the N.R.L in some way it would remove the constant pressure put upon them by head office. If we had independant referees, how it would be set up iv no idea I'm just summizing, I think once they're free of the N.R.L micromanagement we would see referees similar to the ones we had in the 90s, where they all worked within the guidelines, all pretty much had a good feel for the game, could think on the go. I just think the ref's we have running around now are that scared of getting things wrong, they've become robots, add to that the bunker scrutinising everything to the nth degree they're petrified of making a call cause they don't Want to make mistakes, the decline on the refereeing is purely on the N.R.L. Under Velandys and Abdo with the commission they've steered the game more toward what's palatable for t.v and the corporates. I get that because we need the money to keep it going, but it's coming at the cost of the fanbase, I know people I used to go to games with religiously a few years back that don't give the N.R.L a second thought anymore cause they're now crazy about the A.F.L. I can't do it, like everyone here I'm a Tiger till I die, but I can understand why they would walk away from the game, the fans are frustrated.

I think the biggest reason for the decline in refs is the speed of the game and increased rubbish/wrestle in the ruck.

The 90s had defenders try to roll players onto their back with the whole one high one low routine and laying down to long or hand on ball. We still have these but added gang tackles, crusher, grapple, chicken wing, lapel chokes, ankle locks, knee locks. Add in every tackle is given a different amount of holding time if it's dominant or surrender or if the attacker wins the contact and finds his front. There is just so much going on and more bodies in each collision to monitor.
The game reacted to this by introducing a second ref. It did improve things a little in my opinion.
Then we cut the 2nd ref and introduced the 6 again rule. Firstly on cutting the 2nd ref. The ref must retreat 10m to set the defensive line. This alone means they cannot get into a position to monitor the ruck as well as they should. Not just the fact you are 10m away but you can't get your angles right to watch the ruck and be in correct position for the d line. It's just not possible.
Add in the 6 agains. Ball in play might be a great stat for broadcasters. But a ref is now getting fewer breaks and need more repeat efforts to position themselves correctly.
Now I don't know the NRL budget sheets to know if the 2nd ref truly needed to be axed. But I think this is one big reason for the standards dropping.
The touchies have been woeful this past weekend. There is no excuse for that. Additionally the bunker has been disappointing but I remain steadfast in they are much more often correct then prebunker days. But again no excuse for their poor decisions.

I think you may be correct in that there would be less internal pressure on refs if they were essentially external contractors. But i think much the same pressures would apply. Example being a bunch of bin worthy head highs werent binned and highlighted by the media. The training team (now external) would say guys this, this and this should have been bins and these should have been penalties. The ref team then over reacts and bins/penalises to much. Only difference now they are over compensating their mistakes after an external employer points them out rather than an internal one does.

How would I rejig the ref set up? Firstly I think forward pass technology can't come quick enough, and then return to 2 refs and no linesmen. But let's assume that won't happen.
Well it would need to be trialled say in state cup but my idea would be; the linesmen both set the defensive line standing infield a bit (further infield on the open side but this would be a feel thing) then as play moves towards the sideline they watch for into touch. The ref actually has no set position. He can move around as much as he likes to get the best angle for viewing the ruck and then track the ball for forward passes or touched in flight. There should be no real reason for the ref to be unsighted on most plays this way. It should also reduce the KMs a ref does in a game and thus reduce their fatigue.

Obviously the current set up is not working as well as it should. But we need to find ways to improve it outside of the tired 'more accountability' line. I've said in previous posts refs are already accountable. They do internal reviews every week and are critiqued by fans, commentators and the media at every game. Lack of accountability isn't the issue.

I do like that you are providing a new suggestion in having the ref team external to the NRL, even if I personally cannot see that making much improvement. It may very well do so, and may also be the catalyst for things such as new blood in the refereeing ranks, a drop in the current favouritism among the referees that occurs or even changes on the roles of the ref team such as I have suggested.

 

[liltiger]

I think the biggest reason for the decline in refs is the speed of the game and increased rubbish/wrestle in the ruck.

The 90s had defenders try to roll players onto their back with the whole one high one low routine and laying down to long or hand on ball. We still have these but added gang tackles, crusher, grapple, chicken wing, lapel chokes, ankle locks, knee locks. Add in every tackle is given a different amount of holding time if it's dominant or surrender or if the attacker wins the contact and finds his front. There is just so much going on and more bodies in each collision to monitor.
The game reacted to this by introducing a second ref. It did improve things a little in my opinion.
Then we cut the 2nd ref and introduced the 6 again rule. Firstly on cutting the 2nd ref. The ref must retreat 10m to set the defensive line. This alone means they cannot get into a position to monitor the ruck as well as they should. Not just the fact you are 10m away but you can't get your angles right to watch the ruck and be in correct position for the d line. It's just not possible.
Add in the 6 agains. Ball in play might be a great stat for broadcasters. But a ref is now getting fewer breaks and need more repeat efforts to position themselves correctly.
Now I don't know the NRL budget sheets to know if the 2nd ref truly needed to be axed. But I think this is one big reason for the standards dropping.
The touchies have been woeful this past weekend. There is no excuse for that. Additionally the bunker has been disappointing but I remain steadfast in they are much more often correct then prebunker days. But again no excuse for their poor decisions.

I think you may be correct in that there would be less internal pressure on refs if they were essentially external contractors. But i think much the same pressures would apply. Example being a bunch of bin worthy head highs werent binned and highlighted by the media. The training team (now external) would say guys this, this and this should have been bins and these should have been penalties. The ref team then over reacts and bins/penalises to much. Only difference now they are over compensating their mistakes after an external employer points them out rather than an internal one does.

How would I rejig the ref set up? Firstly I think forward pass technology can't come quick enough, and then return to 2 refs and no linesmen. But let's assume that won't happen.
Well it would need to be trialled say in state cup but my idea would be; the linesmen both set the defensive line standing infield a bit (further infield on the open side but this would be a feel thing) then as play moves towards the sideline they watch for into touch. The ref actually has no set position. He can move around as much as he likes to get the best angle for viewing the ruck and then track the ball for forward passes or touched in flight. There should be no real reason for the ref to be unsighted on most plays this way. It should also reduce the KMs a ref does in a game and thus reduce their fatigue.

Obviously the current set up is not working as well as it should. But we need to find ways to improve it outside of the tired 'more accountability' line. I've said in previous posts refs are already accountable. They do internal reviews every week and are critiqued by fans, commentators and the media at every game. Lack of accountability isn't the issue.

I do like that you are providing a new suggestion in having the ref team external to the NRL, even if I personally cannot see that making much improvement. It may very well do so, and may also be the catalyst for things such as new blood in the refereeing ranks, a drop in the current favouritism among the referees that occurs or even changes on the roles of the ref team such as I have suggested.

I really like the idea of the touch judge coming in to monitor the defensive line to allow the referee to float around the ruck. That would work wonders and clean up heaps of the niggle in the ruck.
It just boggles my mind though how we are where we are with the officiating when in the past it was 2 touchjudges and 1 ref who sorted everything, they made mistakes but the officiating was nowhere near where we are today, they just seemed to be able to run a game better, all the extra tech allows for more scrutiny today so errors today are amplified I get that. The other thing the N.R.L needs to do to fix things if they're so concerned with high shots is start getting coaches away from this wrapping ball defensive technique where guys are grabbing guys upper bodies in contact to wrap them up and wrestle and get the coaches to start retraining the legs tackles we used to see in the 80s and 90s before all the wrestle was brought in. There will still be head knocks it's a contact sport, though it shouldn't be as bad if your point of contact is lower on the body I'd assume.

 

[Jolls]

I really like the idea of the touch judge coming in to monitor the defensive line to allow the referee to float around the ruck. That would work wonders and clean up heaps of the niggle in the ruck.
It just boggles my mind though how we are where we are with the officiating when in the past it was 2 touchjudges and 1 ref who sorted everything, they made mistakes but the officiating was nowhere near where we are today, they just seemed to be able to run a game better, all the extra tech allows for more scrutiny today so errors today are amplified I get that. The other thing the N.R.L needs to do to fix things if they're so concerned with high shots is start getting coaches away from this wrapping ball defensive technique where guys are grabbing guys upper bodies in contact to wrap them up and wrestle and get the coaches to start retraining the legs tackles we used to see in the 80s and 90s before all the wrestle was brought in. There will still be head knocks it's a contact sport, though it shouldn't be as bad if your point of contact is lower on the body I'd assume.

In relation to the high tackles (wrapping the ball and wrestle) they will not dissapear using the stick approach. There is no reward for doing the alternative (legs tackle) as the turn over is too quick. The only way I see it working is to provide an incentive for them to make the legs tackle. My simple solution is to class a head on legs tackle as a dominant tackle and allow a second player to assist in contolling the ruck. There should be no advantage provided for a legs tackle from the side or back as a cover tackle. This would reduce the risk of head knocks, provide the flow the NRL wants, and provide the opportunity for more intra forward pack passing. IMO a much more entertaining game would result from this approach. There may be other methods to achieve the same result but until you provide an alternate option to allow the ruck to be controlled you are just pissing in the wind.

 

[orange&black]

Re Bula to Turuva - Watching it live - he slowed up and passed too early - the dummy and score under the posts was definitely on. Give him time though it was the % play and executed ok with a strike winger. We scored and had poor goal kicking. I think API missed every attempt at goal in the warm up which was ominous before the game.

I think he had time as he ran towards Walsh to come off his right foot , straighten up and commit Walsh better than he did. Passing to Turuva was the right play but he did make it hard for Tito, lucky he is such a great finisher.

 

[Enmore_Tiger]

It was a strange game for me to watch. I already knew the score when I sat down and it looked on paper like a flogging, a late try to make it more respectable - typical Suncorp performance.

But watching the first 30 minutes, I started to wonder if I got the score wrong because Tigers were everywhere: strong defence, gallant running; even slowpokes like Twal taking intercepts, running into holes, putting on shots. The Broncos are a monster pack and Tigers really gave them stick, I can't recall many games like it where the other team had a clearly more experienced / notable pack and we really went after them.

We never really got on top of Carrigan unfortunately, he's such a smart footballer, but we handled Haas well and most of the other lads until Willison got his double.

Typical Tigers unfortunately losing concentration in and around half-time, but you can't take credit away from Broncos for stepping up when those opportunities presented. Would have helped immensely if we'd kicked 2 or 3 of those first tries.

It's obviously a big deal for us not to have Luai, even if both sides lost their halfbacks, it takes away that rudder that Broncos fell back on when we got into the wrestle.

You have to remember that as a fan: when the opposition turns up for the arm wrestle, teams have to fall back on their basics to get the W - kick/chase, shoulders into tackles, presenting a straight line, ball control, opportune runs from DH. Unfortunately for our lads Broncos did those moments better, the classic 1%ers when the game was there for the taking.

Agree with an earlier comment that Galvin has to stay his hand; it's not touch footy, he doesn't need to turn up everywhere. His kicking is pretty good and I don't mind when he decides to run. His support is great.

Galvin's main downside, apart from the sometimes-frantic play, is he will often hold the ball a little too long and kill the play if the defence gets up in a line. Usually that means doubling-back inside and taking the run. His outside players get left empty-handed A LOT. It's again that classic touch footy play where you probe the line then step back to reconsider your options, before driving at selected defenders to get the quick PTB for the next play. That doesn't work in League, they will monster you and slow the PTB if you half-heartedly pull out of a play. He needs to either run intentionally or distribute a bit earlier.

BUT I was fairly optimistic after what was not a great scoreboard. I agree with another poster that this team just needs to get into the habit of winning, to get more outcome from their efforts. Every team fancies their chances against Tigers, because of our reputation, even late in the game and it makes it a little harder to put teams away. We don't yet have that winning formula or elite talent to fall back on for every tough match.

Benji seems cool-headed, I like it.

Great post. I support the positivity here and with other posters.

The only thing I think we should be mindful of the Broncos intensity in the first half wasn't really there, average line speed etc. I thought they were doing just what they need to do and step it up in the second half if required. They seemed to be confident they'd gets us when required.

 

[liltiger]

In relation to the high tackles (wrapping the ball and wrestle) they will not dissapear using the stick approach. There is no reward for doing the alternative (legs tackle) as the turn over is too quick. The only way I see it working is to provide an incentive for them to make the legs tackle. My simple solution is to class a head on legs tackle as a dominant tackle and allow a second player to assist in contolling the ruck. There should be no advantage provided for a legs tackle from the side or back as a cover tackle. This would reduce the risk of head knocks, provide the flow the NRL wants, and provide the opportunity for more intra forward pack passing. IMO a much more entertaining game would result from this approach. There may be other methods to achieve the same result but until you provide an alternate option to allow the ruck to be controlled you are just pissing in the wind.

Spot on.

 

[Year_of_the_Tiger]

There's a few things raised here but:

The NRL have created an environment where Refs have no feel for the game, tow the line and standards have dropped.
I tend to agree. But a lot of the complaints particularly feel for the game are around what constitutes a high tackles and the punishment for these actions. This is not the refs it is on the NRL and their fear of litigation. Yes refs are towing the line as a result but I'm not sure what the alternative truly is. Particularly when you look around what is happening to collision sports around the world, NRL is simply following the same path.
The forward passes not being called this week are another issue. Again I feel they are not performing well enough, but again I believe they will have identified this internally and aim to address it within their systems. Will it gets better? Maybe a little, probably not. Why? Imo the refs simply aren't good enough.

The inability to criticise the referee is the cause for the decline. I can't agree at all. There is no inability to criticise Referees. Referees are criticised in game by commentators, on field by players, post game by media and on line by social media. I'd ask how does the coach also pointing out their mistakes make them more accountable? Additionally, coaches are allowed to comment on specific referee decisions. They are not allowed to attack the referee personally or question their integrity.

Similarly how would a press conference with a ref saying oh, I can see on this footage here I [This word has been automatically removed]ed up. I actually thought this happened or I was unsighted and didn't see this help? It would only create further headlines bagging refs and further discontent amongst fans remembering all the times the ref got a call wrong against their side and fuel the he just hates us mentality.

As to the actual reasoning why a coach shouldn't; the creating of a refs fault culture filtering down and putting off future refs is a concern (even if it is not a concern for you). I have seen the struggles first hand of clubs struggling to get refs for their games. I know of a couple NSW cup refs who refuse NRL contracts because they don't want their kids getting harassed because they got a decision wrong. Secondly (and I know this is a bit soft and modern thinking) but both coaches and refs are employees of the NRL. Workplace laws mean you can't say much more than what you are allowed to say.

An independent training academy for referees may bring about better results. But I don't actually see how. They would still have the same guidelines as the NRL will be giving those guidelines to the independent academy.

The bunker isn't performing well enough. Agreed. Someone pointed out a shepherd in our game that the bunker should have seen amongst other contentious calls from the bunker. But it is a no win situation when the ref makes an error, 9/fox replay it 10 times and as many pundits who say scrap the bunker will be saying we have the technology to reverse this, why aren't we? Also if you can recall some of the stuff that was wrong pre bunker I think there are far more correct calls nowadays.

Perhaps I'm wrong but I just don't see how anything you've suggested results in better refereeing outcomes.

Very good post

 

[jirskyr]

Great post. I support the positivity here and with other posters.

The only thing I think we should be mindful of the Broncos intensity in the first half wasn't really there, average line speed etc. I thought they were doing just what they need to do and step it up in the second half if required. They seemed to be confident they'd gets us when required.

That's interesting, I actually thought the Broncos did bring intensity but we matched it, and they were somewhat shocked.

So rather than confidence they'd still win, it felt to me like the Broncos suspected they'd be dominant early, that didn't happen, then were shocked to be behind on the scoreboard. So they changed tactics a bit, slowed the play, were more careful with the footy.

I think it hurt us a lot to concede that Willison try late in the first half, basically a barge-over, and I felt that gave the Broncos confidence that they still went into the break leading despite the tough first half. Then they came out firing second half and we stalled, then that was it, by the time we got our intensity back the game was gone.

 

[Enmore_Tiger]

That's interesting, I actually thought the Broncos did bring intensity but we matched it, and they were somewhat shocked.

So rather than confidence they'd still win, it felt to me like the Broncos suspected they'd be dominant early, that didn't happen, then were shocked to be behind on the scoreboard. So they changed tactics a bit, slowed the play, were more careful with the footy.

I think it hurt us a lot to concede that Willison try late in the first half, basically a barge-over, and I felt that gave the Broncos confidence that they still went into the break leading despite the tough first half. Then they came out firing second half and we stalled, then that was it, by the time we got our intensity back the game was gone.

I'm happy to read this. No one else has suggested the Broncos intensity was down so I defer to your view on it. Certainly a great out come.

At the end of the game I thought it was a positive day for the club, with notable progression away from the bottom.

 

[Dr_Ice]

You make some good points, though I think separating the refereeing from the N.R.L in an autonomous, independant structure would help referees out of sight. The mixed messaging and micro management from the N.R.L is a massive part of the reason for the decline. If the referees were trained independently from the N.R.L in some way it would remove the constant pressure put upon them by head office. If we had independant referees, how it would be set up iv no idea I'm just summizing, I think once they're free of the N.R.L micromanagement we would see referees similar to the ones we had in the 90s, where they all worked within the guidelines, all pretty much had a good feel for the game, could think on the go. I just think the ref's we have running around now are that scared of getting things wrong, they've become robots, add to that the bunker scrutinising everything to the nth degree they're petrified of making a call cause they don't Want to make mistakes, the decline on the refereeing is purely on the N.R.L. Under Velandys and Abdo with the commission they've steered the game more toward what's palatable for t.v and the corporates. I get that because we need the money to keep it going, but it's coming at the cost of the fanbase, I know people I used to go to games with religiously a few years back that don't give the N.R.L a second thought anymore cause they're now crazy about the A.F.L. I can't do it, like everyone here I'm a Tiger till I die, but I can understand why they would walk away from the game, the fans are frustrated.

A guys from work originally from Adelaide is constantly complaining about the AFL refs, they had a major stuff up last weekend.

Unfortunately needs improvement everywhere

 

[TurnStyle]

The speed he was running at I think at the right time he could have dummied and stepped inside scoring closer to the posts.

Could've, but I thought it was a really unselfish play on his part. Really liked that.

He was practically jogging by the time he passed. I was only thinking he passed a bit early and should've gone the old "pass just before being tackled so you take the defender out" play. (Just rolls off the tongue doesn't it?)

Anyway, it's nice to read people commenting on the good things he does and (finally for many) seeing how fast he really is.

 

[lathami]

I just watched the Hunt NO TRY and that is a terrible decision.
After like 400 replays they come to this decision.
He was about 1 metre over the line already and about 5cm off the ground and scoring himself and Pole touches him. Tell me they take this try of a Storm, Panthers and Broncos team.

Such double standards in the game itself plus in suspensions as well..

I watched the replay for the first time last nite. My god, how bad are the two no tries awarded to the donkeys?!? WTF, the first to Arthurs was the biggest knock on u will find in a game, pathetic call by bunker tool! The offside forward pass to Walter’s from cobbo was just as bad, as Walter’s was offside from the get go, that’s why cobbo chucked it forward because he was waiting for Walter’s to get back in side!!! The commentators talked about it as a bad decisions, but like goldfish they move on quickly.
As u said if this was against a storm, raiders or the donkeys there’d be hell to pay.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

I watched the replay for the first time last nite. My god, how bad are the two no tries awarded to the donkeys?!? WTF, the first to Arthurs was the biggest knock on u will find in a game, pathetic call by bunker tool! The offside forward pass to Walter’s from cobbo was just as bad, as Walter’s was offside from the get go, that’s why cobbo chucked it forward because he was waiting for Walter’s to get back in side!!! The commentators talked about it as a bad decisions, but like goldfish they move on quickly.
As u said if this was against a storm, raiders or the donkeys there’d be hell to pay.

Ironic that two of the teams you mentioned have been ripped off deluxe in GF’s in recent years. The Storm literally had a try taken off them in the GF last year. And the Raiders copped the infamous six again call that ended up not being six again. Both those calls arguably swung those games. What hell was paid exactly?

 

[lathami]

Ironic that two of the teams you mentioned have been ripped off deluxe in GF’s in recent years. The Storm literally had a try taken off them in the GF last year. And the Raiders copped the infamous six again call that ended up not being six again. Both those calls arguably swung those games. What hell was paid exactly?

Please, u cherry pick two instances where it went against them!! Which is your style.
What about the storm’s introduction of all the wrestling moves ie chicken wing, grapple, etc, etc Yet the peanut gallery marvel at what they bring to the game. All I see is salary cheats and exponents of dirty play grub tactics to win games. Don’t respect them one iota! What about wicky, complains about ref calls every single game they lose, then if a call goes their way and they win, ‘that’s footy’ call comes out.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Please, u cherry pick two instances where it went against them!! Which is your style.

Cherry pick? They only happen to be GF’s 😅

Keep playing the victim though. Everyone is out to get us apparently.

 

[lathami]

Cherry pick? They only happen to be GF’s 😅

Keep playing the victim though. Everyone is out to get us apparently.

Typical cherry picker, avoid the favouritism given to so called glamour clubs! What’s your retort to their cap rorting and inventing a grapple tackle that effectively cuts your breathing off, to slow the play the ball. The NRL only did something about it after other clubs started to follow!
Keep playing negative Nancy, that’s what everyone expects from you.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Typical cherry picker, avoid the favouritism given to so called glamour clubs! What’s your retort to their cap rorting and inventing a grapple tackle that effectively cuts your breathing off, to slow the play the ball. The NRL only did something about it after other clubs started to follow!
Keep playing negative Nancy, that’s what everyone expects from you.

Womp womp

 

[twentyforty]

Do you expect the boys to see twal in position for a run and turn the other way? The man is a workhorse, he needs to keep grinding how he is and opportunities will come.

Galvin is an eyes up player, you cannot tame a player like that by forcing him into a set play system, the player will lose himself and you’ll end up with an illias or a Flanagan. He also held his own in defence against haas. May not have been his best game for us but can’t scrutinise the man for playing his game.

As far as sukkar goes, the man held his own comfortably. Definitely thought he was one of our best. Happy to see that you had to eat all your words about him in KOE considering he had a great game.

Benji is trying to bleed the young bloods in. This is how teams create depth, seen many teams do it before us, and there will be many teams doing it after us. He’s doing a great job so far.

There is a reason you’re watching from your couch and not in any position to make a decision on the tigers or the maggies.

Using Twaly as an attack weapon in the red zone?
Well, he has scored 2 tries in his 147 games?
The law of averages suggest there’s another try in him during his next 75 games. Now there’s something to excite fans.
Honestly, I’d rather watch paint dry, but keep plugging away at that idea if it amuses you mate.