No Lawyer - I have scruples.
Even analsley said straight up. He thinks and that the rules are not black and white. Now the ref and the bunker both agreed with me. Now you can say that the ref has been stood down, but has the bunker? Noting the ref sent it to the bunker to have a look because he thought it might be a problem and the bunker decided after umpteen replays it was a problem. You can only assume that Ziggy got a rest because of other decisions in the game.
Now here is where it gets funny. You probably have the electricity generation of a third world country in posts on this forum from people saying Analsley has his faves, has it in for the dogs, is corrupt. Yet he when he calls something in the fave of the Dogs, well analsley said so, he's right etc etc. Now I don't think old mate is corrupt, I think they look at these 50/50 calls and try to work out how to manage any precedents being set. Because the worst thing for the NRL as a whole is a lack of consistency.
Now as for the numbnuts such as
@B-Train that want to talk around you - if I'm wrong I'm wrong. I'm just not wrong and I'm definitely not wrong because Analsley says so. And 99% of you any other day would believe that analsley talks out of his ass. But apparently this time - he's talking gospel. Some of us are not stupid enough to buy into that crap. Guess others are always looking for a harbour bridge to purchase.