GF Dodgy Ref Calls

_G-Dog_

Kennel Legend
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
13,336
Reaction score
7,782
There were quite a few BS calls in the GF..

1. The most blatant one for me was the To'o Try .. Clear shepard/obstruction for mine exactly how the commentators called it ..

2. The Hughes Sin Bin .. Very harsh call I didnt even see him make a movement into the line of the Panthers chaser.. all he did was turn going back towards the ball and stop.. wasnt a sin bin for mine..
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,886
Reaction score
19,130
There were quite a few BS calls in the GF..

1. The most blatant one for me was the To'o Try .. Clear shepard/obstruction for mine exactly how the commentators called it ..

2. The Hughes Sin Bin .. Very harsh call I didnt even see him make a movement into the line of the Panthers chaser.. all he did was turn going back towards the ball and stop.. wasnt a sin bin for mine..
They were both by the bunker, not referee. There were better e.g.'s you could of used. The first one is criminal. The second one Hughes slightly changed his line by one step and the only reason could of been to block Kikau (if Hughes is chasing the ball he wouldn't of stopped and if he wasn't chasing the ball he should of stood still), there wasn't a lot in it, so I agree it was harsh, but to the letter of the rule book it's a sin bin.
 

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,374
Reaction score
19,499
I think Melbourne copped a few good calls early. Then they capitalised on momentum. If I were a conspiracy theorist (which I am on this) I'd say that the refs wanted to ensure that the winning margin was close to avoid paying out any 13+ bets. Very late in the game the refs gave Penrith every opportunity to catch back up. Including the To,o try.

As far as the Hughes obstruction call goes. He did look at Kikau steaming through and step into his path. I didn't see the next binning offence though.

But overall I think too many rules have changed to offer grey areas for the refs discretion to come into play to think games are called down the middle. I'm of the opinion that the NRL allows the gambling sponsor to have some impact on the outcomes to ensure maximum profit.
 

Dogzof95

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
3,204
Reaction score
2,522
Gambling's share of NRL revenue could well double. That brings power.

Malcolm Knox

Journalist, author and columnist for The Sydney Morning Herald.

May 15, 2020 — 11.37am

While many participants in Australian sport are looking at an austere future, one is sitting pretty.

Players, sent home for weeks, are returning to scrawny pay packets. Head office jobs are gone for good. The grassroots are being starved. All so-called inessential projects are being cut. Professional women’s leagues are being sabotaged and discarded as if they were luxury products. Broadcasters are downsizing their contributions, and make no mistake, while any deal will be celebrated as a triumph, they are not only on reduced terms, but they set a precedent for future downward renegotiation. Every dollar is being clawed back, even the cents spent on rugby league referees.

But one stakeholder is set up to do very nicely, thank you very much.

NRL aiming to speed up the game

According to data from credit bureau illion and analytics firm AlphaBeta, sampling the transactions of 250,000 Australians, our weekly spending on online gambling has gone up by 142 per cent during the coronavirus lockdown. Google Trends reports that the search term ‘online casino’ has received double its normal traffic. While sports betting and physical poker machines have gone into abeyance, the shift to online punting has taken root, with a steady increase of one-third, and millions of new accounts being opened. The share price of Tabcorp, Australia’s biggest gambling company, is up 10 per cent since 24 April – a pity, perhaps, for Sportsbet punters who have been banned from wagering on the stockmarket index. Men, of course, are spending seven times more on online gambling than women. If you thought gambling companies saturated your favourite sports already, wait until you see what they’ve got planned for the restart.

Sporting bodies are coy about how much they earn from gambling. The National Rugby League bundles ‘Sponsorship and Wagering’ into one revenue item. The Australian Football League buries it in its $290 million-a-year revenue from commercial operations. Cricket Australia’s annual reports are fairly detailed on expenditure but opaque on revenue, folding almost its entire income into a line item titled ‘Revenue from continuing operations’. Little wonder that players’ unions are so unhappy about the scarce provision of financial detail.

Another reason for this coyness has been that the people who run sports tend to hold their nose with one hand while holding the other out, behind their backs, to collect their gambling receipts. There is not a lot of pride from cricket and football about their partnerships with betting companies. There are billboards aplenty, and the advertising is impossible to avoid, but the administrators’ public spin draws our attention to how they are working so hard to protect children from seeing all those ads, to limit the spread of exotic betting products and sinister data-gathering, and to counter the corruption that gambling brings into sport as surely as night follows day.

Residential electricity customers only. Availability criteria apply.

Bryce Cartwright's Gold Coast Titans are sponsored by bookmaker Neds, one of several tie-ins the NRL has with the gambling industry.

But this prim hypocrisy is the behaviour of times of plenty. Big sports can make out like they don’t have a gambling addiction when their dependency is diluted by other sources of income. When money is rolling in from TV stations, corporate sponsors and fans buying tickets and merchandise, the sports are in a strong enough position to moderate the ambitions and the intrusiveness of their gambling partners.

So what happens when all that other income dries up, while the betting companies are still standing tall?

Take the NRL as an example. Last year its ‘wagering and sponsorship’ revenue accounted for $84 million, not a large chunk of the $556 million the NRL earned, but still the second-biggest item behind broadcast rights. Now let’s look into the future. Last year’s $55 million in game-day receipts can be just about written off this year. The $348 million in cash and contra provided by broadcasters could drop, according to reports, by more than $100 million depending on the outcome of negotiations between the league, Nine and Fox Sports.

Digital revenue ($24 million) and merchandise royalties ($12 million) are wet finger in the wind stuff; the question is not whether they will be down, only how far. When the game’s total revenue falls below $400 million, that gambling money begins to look more and more juicy, and the gambling companies become louder and more influential voices. (League’s $84 million, by the way, does not include direct sponsorships of clubs and facilities by betting companies. Sportsbet has been showering NRL clubs with payments, as the ABC’s 7.30 program recently revealed, and we are so used to stadiums carrying the bastard names of betting products most of us have stopped noticing.)



Gambling revenue contributed approximately one-eighth of the dollars going into the overall rugby league industry last year. This year and next, its relative contribution might approach one-quarter. That brings power.



490538953f6a0c5749c1103266be728a1d357627.jpg

Illustration: Simon Letch

So in walks Peter V’landys, who has already moved the game’s centre of gravity from management to board, from everywhere, in short, to himself. His effectiveness is beyond question. He can, and will, deserve credit for wrestling league back onto the field ahead of everyone else. He might end up wearing yellow and doing the refereeing while he’s at it. As the chief executive of Racing NSW, he is also, axiomatically, a friend to the gambling industry. Racing is a vehicle for punting. The betting industry sees all sports in those terms.

How do we think Chairman Pete will respond to the coming outcry about the surge in gambling promotion in rugby league? What about the collection of analytics and other private information about NRL digital subscribers? Is every community development officer, every grassroots grant, every referee, every women’s club, every hearts-and-minds project, every one of those threatened ventures outside of rugby league’s core business going to be held hostage to ‘the greater good’ of maximising revenue? And if governments try to step in to control the excesses of gambling in rugby league, and they are up against Peter V’landys and Sportsbet, who do you think is going to win that argument? Wanna bet? (Hint: we already know, so the markets are closed.)

Australians piss away – sorry, enjoy the thrill of losing - $24 billion a year on gambling. Online punting only accounts for 5 per cent of this, though its proportion has shot up during the pandemic, even in sports betting, where companies have offered odds on esports and horse racing, which have been able to carry on through the lockdown. When league and other sports get going again, prepare for a celebratory orgy of betting and betting advertising.

I’m not a gambler myself, but if I had to take a punt on which way sports will turn when they come under pressure from their wagering partners, the most prosperous of all their corporate mates, I know who I’d have my money on.
 

TABOO

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 13, 2018
Messages
2,740
Reaction score
3,921
I was at the game, Melbourne were getting ALL the calls and momentum for the whole first half.
They were offside in defense for the essentially whole game and Sutton allowed it.
We also saw several times they made errors and then Sutton blew penalties against Penrith.
Also, I didn't see any issue with Josh Mansour's first try which was disallowed.

Ultimately, I think Melbourne (As usual) benefited far more from the refereeing than Penrith, only once the game was out of reach, they swung momentum back to Penrith to even it out.

Jarome Hughes' sinbin was definitely warranted - He clearly stepped back and to the side to get in the way.
Sinbin of Cheese, I am not so sure.
 

Mr. Ditkovich

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 9, 2017
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
3,462
Combination of horrible refereeing and Penrith losing composure.

Melbourne captialised on the momentum gained early on from very questionable calls. The second half was Penrith’s turn to get those calls.

Just goes to show how refereeing decides the game.
 

Kempsey Dog

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
SC Top Scorer
Tipping Champion
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
23,918
Reaction score
25,492
There were quite a few BS calls in the GF..

1. The most blatant one for me was the To'o Try .. Clear shepard/obstruction for mine exactly how the commentators called it ..

2. The Hughes Sin Bin .. Very harsh call I didnt even see him make a movement into the line of the Panthers chaser.. all he did was turn going back towards the ball and stop.. wasnt a sin bin for mine..
1. Incorrect call
2. Correct call
 

BELMORE

Kennel Addict
Joined
Oct 28, 2013
Messages
7,947
Reaction score
9,217
There were quite a few BS calls in the GF..

1. The most blatant one for me was the To'o Try .. Clear shepard/obstruction for mine exactly how the commentators called it ..

2. The Hughes Sin Bin .. Very harsh call I didnt even see him make a movement into the line of the Panthers chaser.. all he did was turn going back towards the ball and stop.. wasnt a sin bin for mine..
If you didn’t see him make a move towards Kikau or whoever it was then you should go to a doctor mate. There’s something wrong with you (brain tumour possibly?)
 

KambahOne

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
3,659
Reaction score
4,736
They were both by the bunker, not referee. There were better e.g.'s you could of used. The first one is criminal. The second one Hughes slightly changed his line by one step and the only reason could of been to block Kikau (if Hughes is chasing the ball he wouldn't of stopped and if he wasn't chasing the ball he should of stood still), there wasn't a lot in it, so I agree it was harsh, but to the letter of the rule book it's a sin bin.
Excellent summation. I think if Hughes had kept running towards his goal line he still would have impeded Kikau, but it wouldn't have been so obvious. I can't believe how many forward passes from dummy half were allowed...from both teams. There were more than a dozen.
 

gbrussell

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
1,564
Reaction score
2,289
The big majority of Kennelers have zero tolerance of the Sutton Brothers. Our dismal win loss record under them speaks for itself. To not win a game under any particular referee for 18 games in close to 5 years as we have under Gerard speaks volumes. Having refereed in junior league and junior reps I find it virtually impossible to believe that a record like that can happen.

The "Sutton Dynasty" really started in 2017 which I think is the year Bernard took over as head of referrees and thus was no longer a video ref. Matt Cechin was the number 1 ref at the time and had been voted as the best by fans in numerous NRL surveys. Then he made what I consider his fatal mistake.

It was during "the crackdown" when the NRL wanted everything that should be penalised, to happen. One night at Shark Park the dam broke and Matt blew 30+ penalties (all justified imho) and then he sin binned "the king of the koalas" (protected species) Cameron Smith. Before that night he was one of the GF and SOO referees but has not done either of those type of games since.

That opened the door for "the Sutton Dynasty" with Bernard in a key position to make it happen for his brothers. Now he is just one vote on a committee that decides appointments so Graeme Annesley must have been aware of at least perceived nepotism.

In the lead up to the 2020 GF Mick Ennis on Fox Sports outlined the Sharks tactics in the 2016 GF of making Cameron Smith make tackles to dilute his fuel tank. He made 67 tackles. He likened it to "cutting off the head of the snake".

In order to get Gerard out of his lofty and false number 1 ranking the head of the snake (his brother Bernard) has to be cut off first.

Ivan Cleary was 100% correct early in the year after their game against Canberra when he said the Raiders were managed back into the game (by G Sutton) when Penrith got away to a big lead. I have seen him do this numerous time to the Bulldogs when we are miles behind and can't win. Conversely when the game is close towards the end a key penalty against us is blown and it is game over apart from the controversy which in one case still lingers today.

It does lead me to wonder if something murky behind the scenes is going on with a concept the Americans call "points shaving". I hope not but when you see things like this on a regular basis one HAS to have suspicions.

Getting rid of Bernard is the only way that the other brothers can be downgraded from the big games.

I really do hope another referee does SOO. Ashley Klein was number 2 during the Final series. If not him then Grant Atkins would be the likely number 3.

Time for a change.
 

CroydonDog

Kennel Immortal
Gilded
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
19,587
Reaction score
16,637
Camerons Smiths try should have been disallowed , the play the ball was a joke.
perhaps, but the play the ball is a joke in general. That sort of effort is allowed to pass dozen of times in a game.

And don't get me started on players walking/rolling 3 metres forward from the mark.
 

2144superman

Kennel Legend
Joined
Aug 28, 2010
Messages
10,365
Reaction score
15,442
I was at the game, Melbourne were getting ALL the calls and momentum for the whole first half.
They were offside in defense for the essentially whole game and Sutton allowed it.
We also saw several times they made errors and then Sutton blew penalties against Penrith.
Also, I didn't see any issue with Josh Mansour's first try which was disallowed.

Ultimately, I think Melbourne (As usual) benefited far more from the refereeing than Penrith, only once the game was out of reach, they swung momentum back to Penrith to even it out.

Jarome Hughes' sinbin was definitely warranted - He clearly stepped back and to the side to get in the way.
Sinbin of Cheese, I am not so sure.
Bro all the calls ? Penrith smashed them in every stat


POSSESSION

PANTHERS 52%
STORM 48%
COMPLETED SETS
PANTHERS 33
STORM 31
TOTAL SETS
PANTHERS 48
STORM 39

ATTACK

ALL RUN

PANTHERS 195
STORM 163
ALL RUN METRES
PANTHERS 1538
STORM 1416
POST CONTACT METRES
PANTHERS 597
STORM 541
LIKE BREAK
PANTHERS 4
STORM 5
TACKLE BREAKS
PANTHERS 33
STORM 29
KICK RETURN METRES
PANTHERS 192
STORM 81
AVERAGE PLAY THE BALL SPEED
PANTHERS 4

STORM 4

DEFENCE

40/20
PANTHER 0
STORM 0
TACKLES

PANTHERS 331
STORM 331
MISSED TACKLES
PANTHERS 29

STORM 33

DISCIPLINE

RUCK INFRINGEMENTS
PANTHERS 2
STORM 5
PENALTIES CONCEDED
PANTHERS 7
STORM 8
ERRORS
PANTHERS 18
STORM 12
SEND OFF
PANTHERS 0
STORM 0
SIN BINS
PANTHERS 0
STORM 2
 

UndeadShadowMan

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 11, 2016
Messages
3,619
Reaction score
3,616
Bro all the calls ? Penrith smashed them in every stat


POSSESSION

PANTHERS 52%
STORM 48%
COMPLETED SETS
PANTHERS 33
STORM 31
TOTAL SETS
PANTHERS 48
STORM 39

ATTACK

ALL RUN

PANTHERS 195
STORM 163
ALL RUN METRES
PANTHERS 1538
STORM 1416
POST CONTACT METRES
PANTHERS 597
STORM 541
LIKE BREAK
PANTHERS 4
STORM 5
TACKLE BREAKS
PANTHERS 33
STORM 29
KICK RETURN METRES
PANTHERS 192
STORM 81
AVERAGE PLAY THE BALL SPEED
PANTHERS 4

STORM 4

DEFENCE

40/20
PANTHER 0
STORM 0
TACKLES

PANTHERS 331
STORM 331
MISSED TACKLES
PANTHERS 29

STORM 33

DISCIPLINE

RUCK INFRINGEMENTS
PANTHERS 2
STORM 5
PENALTIES CONCEDED
PANTHERS 7
STORM 8
ERRORS
PANTHERS 18
STORM 12
SEND OFF
PANTHERS 0
STORM 0
SIN BINS
PANTHERS 0
STORM 2
18 errors is why Penrith lost
 

Psycho Doggie

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
18,198
Reaction score
26,005
The big majority of Kennelers have zero tolerance of the Sutton Brothers. Our dismal win loss record under them speaks for itself. To not win a game under any particular referee for 18 games in close to 5 years as we have under Gerard speaks volumes. Having refereed in junior league and junior reps I find it virtually impossible to believe that a record like that can happen.

The "Sutton Dynasty" really started in 2017 which I think is the year Bernard took over as head of referrees and thus was no longer a video ref. Matt Cechin was the number 1 ref at the time and had been voted as the best by fans in numerous NRL surveys. Then he made what I consider his fatal mistake.

It was during "the crackdown" when the NRL wanted everything that should be penalised, to happen. One night at Shark Park the dam broke and Matt blew 30+ penalties (all justified imho) and then he sin binned "the king of the koalas" (protected species) Cameron Smith. Before that night he was one of the GF and SOO referees but has not done either of those type of games since.

That opened the door for "the Sutton Dynasty" with Bernard in a key position to make it happen for his brothers. Now he is just one vote on a committee that decides appointments so Graeme Annesley must have been aware of at least perceived nepotism.

In the lead up to the 2020 GF Mick Ennis on Fox Sports outlined the Sharks tactics in the 2016 GF of making Cameron Smith make tackles to dilute his fuel tank. He made 67 tackles. He likened it to "cutting off the head of the snake".

In order to get Gerard out of his lofty and false number 1 ranking the head of the snake (his brother Bernard) has to be cut off first.

Ivan Cleary was 100% correct early in the year after their game against Canberra when he said the Raiders were managed back into the game (by G Sutton) when Penrith got away to a big lead. I have seen him do this numerous time to the Bulldogs when we are miles behind and can't win. Conversely when the game is close towards the end a key penalty against us is blown and it is game over apart from the controversy which in one case still lingers today.

It does lead me to wonder if something murky behind the scenes is going on with a concept the Americans call "points shaving". I hope not but when you see things like this on a regular basis one HAS to have suspicions.

Getting rid of Bernard is the only way that the other brothers can be downgraded from the big games.

I really do hope another referee does SOO. Ashley Klein was number 2 during the Final series. If not him then Grant Atkins would be the likely number 3.

Time for a change.
Great analysis.

My old man worked in the same office as a first grade ref in the early 70s. He asked him once what the key was to get yourself noticed enough to be a first grade ref. The ref told him the key was to try and make the games close...
 

Bulldogz82

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
1,838
Reaction score
1,905
This 6 again restart shit is the biggest rort when it comes to refs especially Sutton the turd, nrl are clueless if they think this is improving the game
 
Top