Shot on Lote

[magpiecol]

I actually didn't have that much of a problem with the tackle itself. Smith is a grub and he clearly doesn't attempt to withdraw his knees, but at the same time Tuqiri is a foot off the ground and Smith is coming it at full pace. I don't exactly know what the bloke is supposed to do, you can't help but raise your knees when you are running. It's not as clear cut as a swinging arm.

In these situations I always ask myself how I would feel if the sides were reversed - whether I'd be happy if St George were awarded a penalty if a Tigers player did the same. The answer is "no". So I couldn't fairly claim the same thing off the other side.

Frankly we got off on similar incidents in previous weeks. Dwyer could very easily have been penalised for his his on JWH (not that I believe he should have been, but I have seen softer head contact been penalised). Geezer and Dwyer also got light sightings for their other sloppy efforts in the finals.

My biggest problem is the inconsistency of such decisions. It shouldn't matter whether it is regular season or finals; 70th minute or 10th. But it clearly does. Refs statisically put their whistles away in second halves of finals. They are afraid to call penalties when matches are tight.

So Bryce Gibbs' knees to the ar$e of Burt last year was apparently worth 3 weeks, but Smith's was worth 75 points on early guilty. THAT is the inconsistency that frustrates fans so "consistently".

Yeah good post

"Good post". You are kidding, both of you. It should have been a penalty (he was sited by the MRC). Knees in the back, are illegal. Does not matter if you are two feet off the ground, standing up, or laying down. PENALTY.

The Dwyer has been voted the best hit for 2010\. How could he have been charged with a high tackle?

Wise up. We were dudded not only in the St. George game but in the Easts game as well. There should not have been scrum in the first place. The easts player clearly lost the ball in the tackle. Wests got it back. Play on, no scrum. Illegal scrum by easts, no penalty.

No penalty for knees in the back, no penalty for a forearm to Farah's head by the St. George hooker and no penalty for the non play the ball by the St. George fullback.

There are two teams in the GF next week that should not be there. (one of them certainly)

 

[Archangel]

This is what Mr Hayne had to say on his Twitter message. It is obvious he clearly doesn't like our team.

**"Tough game last night but pleased with my performance. Hoping for a 9.8 grading from Finchey. Lote lucky not to get pinged for faking"**

Its funny how he big notes himself.

 

[alien]

This is what Mr Hayne had to say on his Twitter message. It is obvious he clearly doesn't like our team.

**"Tough game last night but pleased with my performance. Hoping for a 9.8 grading from Finchey. Lote lucky not to get pinged for faking"**

Its funny how he big notes himself.

it might be a fake account

 

[norm]

The difference was that Smith was playing for Saint George, who were meant to win, Gibs was playing for us, who are never meant to win.

 

[Archangel]

This is what Mr Hayne had to say on his Twitter message. It is obvious he clearly doesn't like our team.

**"Tough game last night but pleased with my performance. Hoping for a 9.8 grading from Finchey. Lote lucky not to get pinged for faking"**

Its funny how he big notes himself.

it might be a fake account

You might be right alien.

 

[norm]

If he is unable to make a decision should he be officiating at all, Mr Finch?

//"I think that's really unfair on referees where they're in a position to make decisions quickly," McCallum told AAP on Sunday.//

awww diddums…......it wasn't exactly a quick decision..... they were standing around for some time

what the….. you are dead set kidding McCallum, they replayed it 10 times, waited minutes for Lote to get up and yet that is making a decision quickly ? If the Spray Tan Kid needs more time than that to make a decision then heaven help us.

 

[JRD]

I will say this,If Gibbs does this to Morris,it is a penalty,end of story. :imp:

And Gibbs would have been sent off

 

[jirskyr]

I actually didn't have that much of a problem with the tackle itself. Smith is a grub and he clearly doesn't attempt to withdraw his knees, but at the same time Tuqiri is a foot off the ground and Smith is coming it at full pace. I don't exactly know what the bloke is supposed to do, you can't help but raise your knees when you are running. It's not as clear cut as a swinging arm.

In these situations I always ask myself how I would feel if the sides were reversed - whether I'd be happy if St George were awarded a penalty if a Tigers player did the same. The answer is "no". So I couldn't fairly claim the same thing off the other side.

Frankly we got off on similar incidents in previous weeks. Dwyer could very easily have been penalised for his his on JWH (not that I believe he should have been, but I have seen softer head contact been penalised). Geezer and Dwyer also got light citings for their other sloppy efforts in the finals.

My biggest problem is the inconsistency of such decisions. It shouldn't matter whether it is regular season or finals; 70th minute or 10th. But it clearly does. Refs statisically put their whistles away in second halves of finals. They are afraid to call penalties when matches are tight.

So Bryce Gibbs' knees to the ar$e of Burt last year was apparently worth 3 weeks, but Smith's was worth 75 points on early guilty. THAT is the inconsistency that frustrates fans so "consistently".

Yeah good post

"Good post". You are kidding, both of you. It should have been a penalty (he was sited by the MRC). Knees in the back, are illegal. Does not matter if you are two feet off the ground, standing up, or laying down. PENALTY.

The Dwyer has been voted the best hit for 2010\. How could he have been charged with a high tackle?

Wise up. We were dudded not only in the St. George game but in the Easts game as well. There should not have been scrum in the first place. The easts player clearly lost the ball in the tackle. Wests got it back. Play on, no scrum. Illegal scrum by easts, no penalty.

No penalty for knees in the back, no penalty for a forearm to Farah's head by the St. George hooker and no penalty for the non play the ball by the St. George fullback.

There are two teams in the GF next week that should not be there. (one of them certainly)

Dwyer's hit was the best this season… just that similar efforts have been consistently penalised. I think they got it 100% correct not to cite him, but the point is that it is never consistently applied. There are some p!ss weak tackles that get penalised when the season is not on the line.

I also totally agree that the scrum vs Roosters was diabolical. Should have been a penalty 100%. But at the same time Heighno should have dived on the ball and he did not. It is the tiny moments that decided these games and unfortunately we made small mistakes that were hugely penalised.

Yes Boyd dropped the play the ball, but Benji also kicked out on the full. Not all errors in the game belonged to referees.

 

[Paris_Cobbs]

Guys , this is my first post. I registered to respond to this post . Specifically about refs decisions. I contacted the NRL after the disgrace of the scrum at the end of the Roosters loss. The reply from the NRL was " to blame the officials for the final result does not fairly reflect how the game panned out . " How can this be . If the rules were adhered to , the Tigers get a penalty and win the game. Robert Finch said the scrum was " consistent with pretty much all scrums in the game " Again, I watch most games every week and I would say the exact opposite to this and say that 99.9% of the time it would have been a penalty or the very least another scrum. The NRL also said that the Tigers player had ample time to fall on the ball. So its alright to get it wrong if the player has time to fall on the ball. I personally felt more anger at being robbed in the Roosters game . Had we won that I think we would be playing St George next week.

Welcome aboard John, I agree with your post. The Roosters should have disappeared in round 1 of the finals, we had the week off and played the Titans, while StG played the Warriors most likely. Wests v StG in the Grand Final. I don't remember ever being more upset about a "loss" than that Roosters debacle.

 

[Tigerdave]

Guys , this is my first post. I registered to respond to this post . Specifically about refs decisions. I contacted the NRL after the disgrace of the scrum at the end of the Roosters loss. The reply from the NRL was " to blame the officials for the final result does not fairly reflect how the game panned out . " How can this be . If the rules were adhered to , the Tigers get a penalty and win the game. Robert Finch said the scrum was " consistent with pretty much all scrums in the game " Again, I watch most games every week and I would say the exact opposite to this and say that 99.9% of the time it would have been a penalty or the very least another scrum. The NRL also said that the Tigers player had ample time to fall on the ball. So its alright to get it wrong if the player has time to fall on the ball. I personally felt more anger at being robbed in the Roosters game . Had we won that I think we would be playing St George next week.

Welcome aboard John, I agree with your post. The Roosters should have disappeared in round 1 of the finals, we had the week off and played the Titans, while StG played the Warriors most likely. Wests v StG in the Grand Final. I don't remember ever being more upset about a "loss" than that Roosters debacle.

I'm still amazed at how a couple of really poor ref calls can change an entire finals series. Yeah more than likely the Titans would have beaten the Panthers, not too sure about the Warriors beating the Raiders at home though, but we'll never know now.

I wonder if Warriors supporters were kicking up a stink after the first week of the finals?

 

[hadds75]

It was a penalty but not a suspenision. It was very very hard on Jeremy Smith as he as running at full pelt. HOWEVER, there is a duty of care, and you cant knee in the back and he made no attempt to withdraw his knees. It is no differnet to the Dwyer penalty vs Canberra with 3 minutes to go. very very HARSH, but you can not make contact with the head (although I dont even think dwyer did). Its the same principle hear, whether deliberate or unintentional, you cant knee someone in the back, particularly leading with knees.

 

[william_rodgers]

Dont know why anyone is surprised @ these decisions, these are the two teams the league wanted. bad boy turns good in carney & the chokers who havent won since 79\. now they have what they wanted.

 

[Yossarian]

Dont know why anyone is surprised @ these decisions, these are the two teams the league wanted. bad boy turns good in carney & the chokers who havent won since 79\. now they have what they wanted.

So the NRL made the Titans play poorly and forced Benji to kick out on the full hey?

This place has more conspiracy theorists than a Citizens Electoral Council meeting…

 

[Geo]

Dont know why anyone is surprised @ these decisions, these are the two teams the league wanted. bad boy turns good in carney & the chokers who havent won since 79\. now they have what they wanted.

So the NRL made the Titans play poorly and forced Benji to kick out on the full hey?

This place has more conspiracy theorists than a Citizens Electoral Council meeting…

:laughing: No Yoss …Benji kicked out on the full cause someone plonked a 100 large on that being the next error in the game at the 68th min mark... :unamused:

 

[innsaneink]

Dont know why anyone is surprised @ these decisions, these are the two teams the league wanted. bad boy turns good in carney & the chokers who havent won since 79\. now they have what they wanted.

I never see these posts at the start of the season, or _before_ the games

 

[thylacine]

Dont know why anyone is surprised @ these decisions, these are the two teams the league wanted. bad boy turns good in carney & the chokers who havent won since 79\. now they have what they wanted.

Why is this so hard to believe? You don't think the NRL has a preference when it comes to the teams making up the grand final? They obviously can't guarantee who but it can be helped along ie. refereeing decisions

 

[Marshall_magic]

This is what Mr Hayne had to say on his Twitter message. It is obvious he clearly doesn't like our team.

**"Tough game last night but pleased with my performance. Hoping for a 9.8 grading from Finchey. Lote lucky not to get pinged for faking"**

Its funny how he big notes himself.

it might be a fake account

It's clearly a fake account.

 

[Muffstar]

Dont know why anyone is surprised @ these decisions, these are the two teams the league wanted. bad boy turns good in carney & the chokers who havent won since 79\. now they have what they wanted.

So the NRL made the Titans play poorly and forced Benji to kick out on the full hey?

This place has more conspiracy theorists than a Citizens Electoral Council meeting…

:laughing: No Yoss …Benji kicked out on the full cause someone plonked a 100 large on that being the next error in the game at the 68th min mark... :unamused:

Crap u saw me at the Tab, busted :slight_smile: