Contentious points in the grand final

[The DoggFather]

Not to also mention the try that went begging, nearly would have been a similar effort to the Barba/Morris try at Mackay!

Yeah, I was thinking that at the game too

 

[Guardog]

Ladies and Gents.

Everything I have read here is our season. This has been the norm all year for us. I am not surprised by any of it. We must have pissed off someone very very much.

 

[HajdukSplit]

I must say, the most iritating part of the game was Melbourne continuosly walking off the mark in the play the ball to roll through the ruck.

Melbournes game plan was simple, walk off the mark to distinguish the markers and roll through the ruck and consistently stay inside the 10 to rush up on keating,reynolds,barba,morris etc, and they got away with it.

the only thing I do not understand is why we didnt put a kick in behind on the rush up defence like what the Raiders did to us, and what cronk did on Sunday and what we did to Manly at Brookvale this year

 

[Book]

Whilst I can understand the frustration over some calls in the match perhaps the fact the better team won might have something to do with it?

Should we remember the knock on before the first Melbourne try? And their second and third tries also came off Canterbury drop balls.

It was never an 8 point try for the Dogs. The boys also missed a lot of tackles and had a VERY poor completion rate. Many 5th tackle options were poor as well. The bounce of the ball just did not go our way.

That was a knock on for your life. Ball knocked forward into a Melbourne hand. Correct call was made.

Also the tackle on Morris in the 29th minute was a loose carry. The Melbourne player was making a tackle and not making a play at the ball. Then at the end of the following set Reynolds runs down field and drops the ball. From the ensuing penalty, which was a fair penalty Canterbury had a poor defensive read which led to the Slater try.

Melbourne outplayed the Bulldogs right across the park and deserved to win, it's as simple as that.

I actually thought the refs had a pretty good game, and most people that aren't wearing blue and white glasses seem to agree...

Funny how the original post didnt mention the blatant wrong call by the referee's to give the Bulldogs a scrum feed right in the Storm's red zone after an incorrect rule that the Storm player had touched the ball which was actually batted backwards by a Bulldog... But alas the Bulldogs were'nt good enough to score off that chance.

Bad calls will be made and are made, but there was nothing that changed this game, the better team won, as is usually the case... If Cameron Smith could kick then the scoreline wouldnt have even been close.

Would either of you care to counter my point regarding the constant slowing down of the ruck and persistant lazy running? And the fact that both factors relate directly to Archer's comments about 'wanting a fast game' after penalising us early on for slowing the play the ball down.

Neither of you have mentioned anything to counter this. It's understandable some calls will be made and they will be wrong, but this is on another level.

 

[Fully Sik Drop kick]

Sack Hasler !!! ...................jokes.. never!!!!

 

[steve_mortimer]

Would either of you care to counter my point regarding the constant slowing down of the ruck and persistant lazy running? And the fact that both factors relate directly to Archer's comments about 'wanting a fast game' after penalising us early on for slowing the play the ball down.

Neither of you have mentioned anything to counter this. It's understandable some calls will be made and they will be wrong, but this is on another level.

If the referee wants a fast game then you have to play accordingly. Sure the first couple of pens against us were a little harsh but those things are judgement calls by the referee. I watch back games I referee on DVD and sometimes think to myself "Jeez, I was a little harsh on those A and B defenders" or some such.

At the end of the day Canterbury gifted all three Melbourne tries by poor defensive reads and dropped ball. Don't drop the ball, complete your sets and don't miss tackles and you more often than not win the game. Watching at the ground for me it just looked like Melbourne were more hungry for it.

Joel Garner once said that when the West Indies were blitzing all before them in the 1970s and 80s they would sometimes need to take 13 or 14 wickets in an innings due to umpires on the sub continent giving them a rough deal. They just got on with it.

And getting on with it is what the Canterbury boys should do as we should also do.

 

[Book]

If the referee wants a fast game then you have to play accordingly. Sure the first couple of pens against us were a little harsh but those things are judgement calls by the referee. I watch back games I referee on DVD and sometimes think to myself "Jeez, I was a little harsh on those A and B defenders" or some such.

At the end of the day Canterbury gifted all three Melbourne tries by poor defensive reads and dropped ball. Don't drop the ball, complete your sets and don't miss tackles and you more often than not win the game. Watching at the ground for me it just looked like Melbourne were more hungry for it.

Joel Garner once said that when the West Indies were blitzing all before them in the 1970s and 80s they would sometimes need to take 13 or 14 wickets in an innings due to umpires on the sub continent giving them a rough deal. They just got on with it.

And getting on with it is what the Canterbury boys should do as we should also do.

I'm not talking about the penalties against us. I'm talking about the fact that they openly set a precedent which was not followed up against the other team (Melbourne).

Your example of the dominant West Indies sides proves nothing, it doesn't justify poor refereeing.

 

[Chris Harding]

There is another point I would appreciate your (or anyone's) comment upon. About 25 minutes into the second half, after the Barba break down the left and kick through, Morris kicked ahead. Morris was pretty much over the try line and knocked the ball forward but in the air. As Morris went to regather Slater ran through and jumped over Morris appearing to contact Morris with his hands (at that point Morris was not in possession) then before Morris regathered Slater punched the ball dead. A 20m tap was awarded to Melbourne.

QUOTE]

I just watched the replay. Slater jumps onto Morris' back and has his arm around Morris' throat before he hits the ball away. Morris is already being pushed down as Slater touches the ball. I'm pretty sure that Inglis was awarded a penalty try for exactly the same type of contact before he could gather the ball.

But, we musn't complain. The better team won on the day, obviously.

 

[dogsday]

I still don't understand why the ref's didn't get the Clive Churchill medal. LOL

 

[The-Game]

Ref's were sh*t yes, but it still wasn't an excuse for how many times we dropped the ball. But it was frustrating being penalised for being slow to get up, yet Storm could use our players as a lounge and weren't penalised. But the positive we came so much further then was ever expected and it's something the boys should be very proud of.

 

[dogsday]

Ref's were sh*t yes, But the positive we came so much further then was ever expected and it's something the boys should be very proud of.

aas we all should be (proud of the boys)

 

[polecat]

The refs were hard on us as they have been all season and for many seasons now.

However we were extremely lucky not to have James Graham sent off, I honestly cant
believe how he stayed on the field and I love the bloke!

A couple of our key forwards decided to have the night off, some shonky calls and
we were beaten by the better team on the night unfortunately : (

 

[Dognacious]

Kasiano was names Daly M prop of the year and has just been named in the NZ test team

Im disappointed anyone bit with bite mans blatant trolling attempt. No bulldog fan thinks what he said, he was looking to get a rise out of someone. The very definition of trolling.

 

[Bob dog]

You gotta play perfect discipline and be a brown tounge in the refs eyes, as soon as you run in and put a player in a headlock or look like a biter the ref will think you are a fvckstick and play us out of it.

 

[old school dog]

I don't go with the popular view that the Storm were the best team on the day. The Dogs were desperately unlucky. I've finally had the courage to watch the replay this last few days, and, gee, we were so close to winning that. Really unlucky.

 

[Bob dog]

It was still pretty close despite the Storms discipline and fudgy ref, we lost the ball too many times and kept putting ourselves under pressure, every meter counts in a GF and we just didn't produce our best footy.

 

[storm2012]

I don't go with the popular view that the Storm were the best team on the day. The Dogs were desperately unlucky. I've finally had the courage to watch the replay this last few days, and, gee, we were so close to winning that. Really unlucky.

you were close(courtesy of Cam`s wayward kicking for goal) BUT NOT CLOSE ENOUGH.

 

[old school dog]

you were close(courtesy of Cam`s wayward kicking for goal) BUT NOT CLOSE ENOUGH.

Thanks for that.

 

[Guardog]

I still can't get myself to push the 'play' button on the game that is stored in the recorder. I am still in the "what may have been" mood. I'm glad that Bathurst was a week later. It stopped me being in a bad mood for that week. So, I am still lamenting. I will soon get over it.

Still, after the season we had, I can't really complain.

I don't go with the popular view that the Storm were the best team on the day. The Dogs were desperately unlucky. I've finally had the courage to watch the replay this last few days, and, gee, we were so close to winning that. Really unlucky.

 

[magdog]

Agree with some others here about the Billy "Teflon" Slater holding back of Morris in his attempt to play at the ball. The refs ruled knock on, which to most appeared to be the correct interpretation of the rule....not one commentator even hinted at the fact that Morris was CLEARLY IMPEDED in his attempt to regather the ball after tapping it into the air. Now I know that Slater was going for the ball, but in any other competition or jump for the ball, if the player is impeded in making play for the ball, it is a straight penalty.

In this instance, Morris is leading the chase for the ball, he gets a hand to it, then just as he is about to make a jump for the ball, Teflon Slater strangles Morris's around the neck and shoulders, clearly preventing him from making a play for the ball, THEN HE pulls off the try scoring play of knocking it out. It is NOT as if he flew through the air and miraculously got to the ball, he got there by clambering all over Morris, in the process impeding him from getting to the ball. To add insult to injury, we know they got the ball from the restart even though Teflon Slater is the last on to touch the ball. Game set and match right there.....amazing that not one commentator or reporter saw it as even remotely contentious.

Would have loved the situation had been reversed with Slater chasing the ball through and Morris jumping all over him to see if the refs could have found a different interpretation.....I suspect it would have been looked at a little more closely.

.....let it go, I know , I know....I am still at the "what if" stage of the Losing GF grieving process.