dogluva
Kennel Immortal
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2007
- Messages
- 17,723
- Reaction score
- 8,398
Well, well, well. So the Referees boss has told us that the last pass for the match wining Roosters try was forward. Fans at the ground and those watching on the television broadcast knew this at the time but due to the inability of the touch judge ( who Archer says was right there and had a good view of it) to pick it up plus the two referees and the video referee the Roosters were gifted a win that they had no right to have.
It was more unsettling that the try that Penrith had disallowed, that could have truly put the game out of the reach of the Roosters, was looked at with a fine tooth comb because they could ( and yes it was according to the laws of the game a correct ruling regarding inside the 10 ) yet they still could not check the Roosters one which was blatantly obvious.
It is well and good to apologize to all for the stuff ups but that does not make a difference to quite a few things, such as the two points Penrith missed out on nor the for and against of both sides.
I for one am getting heartily sick and tired of apologies after the fact.
Another thing that grinds my gears is the inability of the video referee to now look at things in general play that also have an effect on the result; strips, touches of the ball, knock ons etc. let alone the fact that they have never been able to adjudicate on forward passes ( although they did so with great effect last year when we became the first, and at the moment, the only team to be denied a try on what could only have been a thought of a forward pass ruling even though that was not the issue according to the referee; my opinion; denial by proxy)
Yesterday there was another great opportunity for the video ref to alert the on field official that Souths had won a scrum illegally. Trent Hodkinson tells the referee that his decision regarding the scrum win against the feed by Souths and the resultant penalty given has "Cost us the game". That is true. So, for speaking his mind, quite like Cameron Smith or JT does frequently he is singled out for punishment . I did not hear a swear word or a cheating accusation, just a simple comment that was a fact. The scrums are a 'non-contest' and have been for years with no striking for the ball and no pushing in the scrum allowed ; the ball fed by the half back basically between their prop and second rowers feet. HOW on earth can you lose a scrum when the laws of the game dictate their is to be basically no contest?
It is comforting to know too Mr Archer ,that no matter what a player does on the field by way of foul play, he will not be dismissed from the field for the rest of the game. Burgess and his wayward elbow should have led to his instant dismissal and a date with the judiciary. Why just send him for ten and put him on report? Newcastle scored twice during his absence; that was quite fitting, but why allow Souths to finish the game 13 on 13 without what many would say was really a proper penalty? If that Newcastle player had been put out of the game the only side being penalised would have been Newcastle.
Sam Burgess was very lucky not to have gone too, for his running a considerable distance to stick up for his grubby brother, which he does frequently. Well and good to stick up for a team mate but why when that team mate is one who has thrown an elbow into an opponents head?
What is the bet that their will be ANOTHER adjustment to the rules next year that says the video ref has once again the power to rule on things that are now out of his job description this year.
This whole mess has been caused by the now CEO of the NRL making sure that his precious officials are not actually answerable for errors that they make because they are beyond criticism. Makes any apology given meaningless, as the on field officials continue to get it wrong without the ability of someone who has a mass of technology at his disposal to correct it.
It was more unsettling that the try that Penrith had disallowed, that could have truly put the game out of the reach of the Roosters, was looked at with a fine tooth comb because they could ( and yes it was according to the laws of the game a correct ruling regarding inside the 10 ) yet they still could not check the Roosters one which was blatantly obvious.
It is well and good to apologize to all for the stuff ups but that does not make a difference to quite a few things, such as the two points Penrith missed out on nor the for and against of both sides.
I for one am getting heartily sick and tired of apologies after the fact.
Another thing that grinds my gears is the inability of the video referee to now look at things in general play that also have an effect on the result; strips, touches of the ball, knock ons etc. let alone the fact that they have never been able to adjudicate on forward passes ( although they did so with great effect last year when we became the first, and at the moment, the only team to be denied a try on what could only have been a thought of a forward pass ruling even though that was not the issue according to the referee; my opinion; denial by proxy)
Yesterday there was another great opportunity for the video ref to alert the on field official that Souths had won a scrum illegally. Trent Hodkinson tells the referee that his decision regarding the scrum win against the feed by Souths and the resultant penalty given has "Cost us the game". That is true. So, for speaking his mind, quite like Cameron Smith or JT does frequently he is singled out for punishment . I did not hear a swear word or a cheating accusation, just a simple comment that was a fact. The scrums are a 'non-contest' and have been for years with no striking for the ball and no pushing in the scrum allowed ; the ball fed by the half back basically between their prop and second rowers feet. HOW on earth can you lose a scrum when the laws of the game dictate their is to be basically no contest?
It is comforting to know too Mr Archer ,that no matter what a player does on the field by way of foul play, he will not be dismissed from the field for the rest of the game. Burgess and his wayward elbow should have led to his instant dismissal and a date with the judiciary. Why just send him for ten and put him on report? Newcastle scored twice during his absence; that was quite fitting, but why allow Souths to finish the game 13 on 13 without what many would say was really a proper penalty? If that Newcastle player had been put out of the game the only side being penalised would have been Newcastle.
Sam Burgess was very lucky not to have gone too, for his running a considerable distance to stick up for his grubby brother, which he does frequently. Well and good to stick up for a team mate but why when that team mate is one who has thrown an elbow into an opponents head?
What is the bet that their will be ANOTHER adjustment to the rules next year that says the video ref has once again the power to rule on things that are now out of his job description this year.
This whole mess has been caused by the now CEO of the NRL making sure that his precious officials are not actually answerable for errors that they make because they are beyond criticism. Makes any apology given meaningless, as the on field officials continue to get it wrong without the ability of someone who has a mass of technology at his disposal to correct it.
