Refs wouldn't have made a difference imo. We simply ran into a team who could score way more points than we were capable of. We did well to hang on as long as we did, our team was absolutely running on fumes by this point.[
As good as Souffs were, there were interpretations of the rules which favoured them, throughout the GF.
The Tolman penalty 30m out straight in front was a clear case of GBurgii holding his arm. Now this wouldn't bother me so much, if in the first half Auvaa or whatever his name is did exactly the same thing on JJ to extract a penalty....which....drum roll please...led to their first try!
Now you can say that Souths played better or whatever, but our whole strategy in this match was to counterpunch to the very end, much like round 1. We were never going to blow them away.
Like the Prelim final v Parra in 98, Parra were the better team for 72mins in that game, does that not mean we arentl entitled to chance to win the game if we score more points?
I get what you're saying, and had we played Souths 10 times this year they'd probably have beaten us 7-8 times out of 10, but GFs and finals ARE different, and these interpretations, like conveniently overlooking a clear offside penalty 10m out to the Dogs and rather give a drop out, makes a massive difference if you've been defending for 70mins of the game to stay in it.
We may not won, or "deserved" to win by traditional measures, but we weren't given an opportunity to at least put on a barnstorming finish....instead the momentum shifted & it was lights out from that point.
