The refereeing

underdog said:
It's this stuff that concerns me - Luciano Leilua "try" a few weeks ago was another one that was overlooked as well. THere has been major decisions in games that warrant a second look being brushed over - and every time it seems to be a struggling team.

It's as if only certain aspects are "looked over" when what's being sold to us the punter is that everything is being watched in the background by the bunker.

Apart from Nofoaluma being told to stop and a drop out being called, and THAT decision not being overturned, another concerning one was the Try in the Dragons/Knights game where Lomax jumped on Frizell after the apparent blunder.

Go back and watch the lead up - Frizell actually inadvertently grounds the ball in goal - constituting a line drop out. I haven't got a screenshot here of it, but I know it's easily found on the equivalent Knights Facebook Groups to our Tigers ones - and they lost 21-16.

Then the Patrick Herbert No Try for the Warriors against the Roosters.

This weekend has highlighted plenty of examples or "haves/Have nots" in the NRL.

Credit to the Tigers for overcoming the odds for once.

However coupled with a couple of rough calls and forward passes leading to tries in the storm game, and a few rough calls in the Warriors game, we could very easily be sitting at 3-3 or even 4-2 if we had gotten up in the Titans game.
Click to expand...
Yep spot on mate .one good thing with us doing alot of defence in these early rounds has improved our match fitness by alot .so if we cut the mistakes down who knows what's ahead
 
If you are all complaining about having to overcome bad refereeing decisions against Parramatta, wait until Sunday when we play Souffs, "The Pride of the League."

That will be a whole new level of adversity that we need to overcome if we have any plans of winning that game.

At least that filthy grub Latrine isn't playing, so he won't be out there getting away with some of the crap he has gotten away with playing against us in the past.

EDIT: Saturday. (even shorter turn around)
 
That clown owes us 2 competition points but doubt that we get any favourable calls playing against "The Pride of the League."
 
Just watched Annessly Rd 6 briefing where he devoted 15 minutes saying ref's don't favour elite teams on close calls .He preceded this by selecting a couple of examples of decisions that were actually close calls id say carefully selected incidents one roosters game one dragons game. He did not address any incident in tigers game ?would like to ask him did Nofu really ground the ball as ref said leading to a goal line drop out instead of our ball in the field of play
amongst others I'd say were not 50/50 but just wrong .or do I believe eels only once inside 10m in whole game and zero hold downs against us.I remember we lost a 2 tries a piece game against warriors when Luciano try not even sent to bunker
 
Stevec said:
Just watched Annessly Rd 6 briefing where he devoted 15 minutes saying ref's don't favour elite teams on close calls .He preceded this by selecting a couple of examples of decisions that were actually close calls id say carefully selected incidents one roosters game one dragons game. He did not address any incident in tigers game ?would like to ask him did Nofu really ground the ball as ref said leading to a goal line drop out instead of our ball in the field of play
amongst others I'd say were not 50/50 but just wrong .or do I believe eels only once inside 10m in whole game and zero hold downs against us.I remember we lost a 2 tries a piece game against warriors when Luciano try not even sent to bunker
Click to expand...

The integrity and or judgment of the referees has never been so low in the eyes of many supporters from most clubs.Every week you expect the majority of the important calls go in favour of the so called "elite" clubs.Annesley can talk as much as he likes but that will not change what supporters see in front of them every week.There is blatant bias even if in it is possibly subconscious
 
Let's see what sort of calls we get against the Pride of the League with the ref that owes us 2 competition points.
 
We shouldn't say " oh the ref is crap, but we won so who cares ? "
The time to be critical of reffing is when you win. If anyone at all is listening, they won't listen to the losing side's gripes . . . coz it's just "sore losers".
Win the game, and your criticisms have a bit more respectability to them.
That's why the roosters and storm get things their way. Well, that's only one reason . . . .
 

Annesley addresses 'misconception' about bottom teams​

AuthorBrad WalterNRL.com Senior ReporterTimestampTue 19 Apr 2022, 06:06 PM

NRL head of football Graham Annesley has appealed for coaches to avoid fuelling the misconception that lower placed teams receive less favourable decisions than those near the top of the Telstra Premiership ladder.

Annesley used his weekly media briefing on Tuesday to try to put an end to the growing narrative around contentious calls since Gold Coast coach Justin Holbrook spoke out about refereeing decisions against his team in their round one loss to Parramatta.


North Queensland coach Todd Payten echoed Holbrook’s comments after the Cowboys had three players sin-binned during their round four loss to Sydney Roosters.

Graham Annesley weekly football briefing - Round 6

Graham Annesley weekly football briefing - Round 6

With other coaches, commentators and journalists having since weighed into the debate, it has become an ongoing talking point but Annesley said the comments were misguided and called for coaches to take greater responsibility.

“We have got rules in place, and always have had, if coaches overstep the mark but this isn’t just coaches, it is members of the media and it does the rounds on social media,” Annesley said.

“It is just a growing noise in the background but when coaches are saying these things, they are respected people in our game and of course fans are going to listen to that and take some notice of it.

“Absolutely, coaches have got a responsibility to the game and I can’t put it in any other terms except to say it is misguided and it is a misconception.”

“Of course, people are going to be upset when close decisions don’t go their way but in most instances the other coach would be equally upset if the decision had gone the other way.”
Annesley played audio from the opening 26 minutes of Friday's Rabbitohs-Bulldogs clash before Jeremy Marshall-King was sinbinned, in which referee Gerard Sutton could be heard issuing repeated warnings to Canterbury after five six-again calls and two penalties.

Marshall-King in the bin

Marshall-King in the bin
There was also controversy over whether Dragons forward Jayden Su’A had been off-side when he dived on a ball that had been tapped back by Zac Lomax from the kick-off after the centre had landed a 78th minute field.


Newcastle coach Adam O’Brien questioned the decision to play on, as did members of the Channel 9 commentary team, and fans shared screen shots on social media showing Su’A in front of Lomax when the centre contested the short kick-off.

However, Annesley said Su’A had got himself in a position behind or level with where Lomax had touched the ball when he dived on it so was onside.

“The referee could have easily ruled that off-side. I don’t think he would have been right if he did but it is so tight,” Annesley said.

“There has been a number of comments made publicly, in some cases after games by coaches and in other cases in the media, about teams at the bottom end of the ladder not getting the so-called 50-50 decisions.

“I want to try to put to bed this theory that is floating around. The referees when they make calls are just seeing something and reacting instantly. They simply respond to what they see.”

Knights attempt short kickoff

Knights attempt short kickoff

Annesley said that teams at the bottom end of the ladder often concede more penalties because they have less possession so are therefore doing more defending.
“You are much more likely to commit offences when you are defending than when you are attacking - you will be offside more and you are much more likely to be committing offences in the rucks.

“I could go to each of the eight winning coaches each week and ask them if there were things in their game where they didn’t get the decision they thought they should have got and I will guarantee that all eight will say, ‘absolutely, I’ll send you the tape’.

“Equally, I could go to the eight losing coaches and they will say the same thing. In some cases, they will say it publicly and I get that they are disappointed and looking for reasons why they lost.

“But that doesn’t mean when it comes to making individual decisions that anything is driving that other than the officials trying to make the right decision.”

However, Annesley said there had been inconsistencies between decisions made by the Bunker in Sunday's Roosters-Warriors match at the SCG- both of which favoured the home team.
Roosters forward Angus Crichton was ruled not to have played a role in Addin Fonua-Blake losing the ball, despite having his hand on the ball, but Adam Pompey was penalised when his foot dislodged the ball as Crichton was playing it.


"We have got two different outcomes for what are essentially the same type of offence," Annesley said. "I think in both cases they should have been penalties.

"You can't get away from the fact that the action of the defender in both cases played some part in the player in possession losing the ball."
 
The Pawwa fans were comedy.

Apparently we were the ones that had the skinny 10 meters all game and they were perfect.

Of course they were silent when Roberts (I think it was?) was held back in the final couple mins of the game. We should have had a penalty goal right infront to win the game
 
Geo said:
Long read.. so I'll sum it up ..Of course Refs screw the lower team but since 1908 we don't care..

Thanks Mr Annessley..
Click to expand...
It's not just the 50-50 calls though. It's what they do and don't referee. I'm going to analyze the Penrith and Eels/WT games from the weekend to see how many times the defending team was penalised to give the opposition a free ride out of their own end. They're the ones that hurt. It's so much hard work to come away from your goal line and get decent field position, if it's gifted to you, the advantage is enormous. You can even advantage a team while still giving less than a 50/50 share of penalties, if you give them in the right field position.
If you give one team 10 penalties on first tackle in the middle third and the other team 7 on the fifth tackle either on their own line or down the other end, the team with 7 penalties is miles in front.
 
No six again calls. Parra got away with murder in the ruck. In saying that both sides looked like NFL teams with the amount of forward passes that were let go. Fundamental mistakes by the ref.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 374 (members: 4, guests: 370)
Back
Top