Conspiracy Theory.

[Guest]

Gold Coast
Penrith
Parramatta

These three teams will get the "rub of the green" in 2011.

Gonna put your house on em?

[Guest]

so you're saying that, based on whoever's "the flavour of the month", the NRL then give directives to referees and video referees asking that the "flavour of the month" team(s) be given preferential treatment in terms of on field decisions so that they can win more matches?

and you're suggesting that next season, because the NRL want the Gold Coast to do well because there's a new AFL team there, that the referees will be asked by the NRL to be biased towards the GC so that they win more matches?

Either that or the refereeing has reached a level of bad that beggars belief. Decisions like the Gasnier try, the Morris in touch in the GF and the Falau try against us (and that is just off the top of my head) are not 50/50 calls, they are 100/0 calls that cannot be justified by incompetence.

TOK, what do you put this down to just for interest sake?

[Guest]

Pretty much - yes.

I shouldn't have said 'flavour of the month', more 'flavour of the year'.

And I don't think it is limited to refereeing decisions. The planning of the draw, adjudications on salary cap, planning of byes, assessment of rule changes to suit different team styles, judiciary decisions can all be influenced.

There is no question that the competition is closer now than it has ever been. Only a small advantage in any of the areas listed above is enough to see a team make the eight or flounder at the bottom of the table.

To think that sport is different to other aspects of society and immune to unethical behaviour and decisions is laughable. There has always been favouritism in sport and always will be.

I definitely think St George were shown favouritism this year in various aspects of the game.

that's unfortunate, because your posts here are usually on the money

there's no directive given to the referees from the NRL to favour any teams, and you fall into the realm of the crazed, deluded fan by suggesting there is

[Kramer]

[QUOTE=Fleabag Fletch;92616]Pretty much - yes.

I shouldn't have said 'flavour of the month', more 'flavour of the year'.

And I don't think it is limited to refereeing decisions. The planning of the draw, adjudications on salary cap, planning of byes, assessment of rule changes to suit different team styles, judiciary decisions can all be influenced.

There is no question that the competition is closer now than it has ever been. Only a small advantage in any of the areas listed above is enough to see a team make the eight or flounder at the bottom of the table.

To think that sport is different to other aspects of society and immune to unethical behaviour and decisions is laughable. There has always been favouritism in sport and always will be.

I definitely think St George were shown favouritism this year in various aspects of the game.[/QUOTE]

One would hope, that when the Independant Commission is in place this sort of thing will stop.
There will no News Ltd involvement trying to prop up their investment. I have alway felt that there was a conflict of interest in the game with them owning clubs and administering the game through their own self appointed management people.

[Guest]

Either that or the refereeing has reached a level of bad that beggars belief. Decisions like the Gasnier try, the Morris in touch in the GF and the Falau try against us (and that is just off the top of my head) are not 50/50 calls, they are 100/0 calls that cannot be justified by incompetence.

TOK, what do you put this down to just for interest sake?

exactly what you said

the standard of refereeing is appallingly bad, and those calls are down to utter incompetence

[Guest]

exactly what you said

the standard of refereeing is appallingly bad, and those calls are down to utter incompetence

Fair enough. In that case, I would be keen to see what the NRL is doing about it.

[Guest]

Do you think the planning of the draw, salary cap adjudications or judiciary decisions have ever favoured certain teams to assist in their success?

Do you think no one in the NRL had any idea the Storm were cheating the salary cap?

I would be thrilled to be wrong and the NRL had the utmost integrity, but I think there is and always has been an element of favouritism present.

I'm not saying the Dragons weren't the best team in the comp, but there are aspects of their style that the refs seemed to turn a blind eye to (e.g. taking off in defence early on tackles 1-4 to ensure the opposition gets no momentum). This can be put down to Bennet outsmarting the refs, or it can be put down to a direction for the refs not to focus on this aspect of the game.

As to your assertion that I am a crazed, deluded fan, this could well be true. Regardless of a question mark on certain influences on the game, it is still the game and the sport that I am extremely passionate about. Sometimes passion can blind one to the truth. But sometimes naivety and trust also can.

[Guest]

that's unfortunate, because your posts here are usually on the money

there's no directive given to the referees from the NRL to favour any teams, and you fall into the realm of the crazed, deluded fan by suggesting there is

What did you think when Falou was given that try?

What did you think when Harrigan after all the looks at it he had, gave Gasnier that try?

What did you think when the touch judge who was on top of Morris stepping out in the Grand Final, did nothing?

[elo]

It'll be interesting to see how the Dragons are refereed next season, if the blatant favouritism has vanished with the Premiership in the bag and ****wit Finch gone the 2010 season should be asterix marked like all the Storm seasons tbh.

[Johnny Tobin]

that's unfortunate, because your posts here are usually on the money

there's no directive given to the referees from the NRL to favour any teams, and you fall into the realm of the crazed, deluded fan by suggesting there is

Certain things that some teams do are pointed out in their sessions and they come onto the field with pre-conceived ideas.

[Guest]

Certain things that some teams do are pointed out in their sessions and they come onto the field with pre-conceived ideas.

As well as individuals are targeted by the refs, Moz only had to scratch his ear and he was up on a high tackle.

Chook.

[player 1]

that's unfortunate, because your posts here are usually on the money

there's no directive given to the referees from the NRL to favour any teams, and you fall into the realm of the crazed, deluded fan by suggesting there is

How do you know that? If members of the police, judiciary and government can be proven at times to be guilty of corruption, why are you so certain of the purity of officials running a sport for the profit of its owners (News Ltd)?

[Guest]

Having trouble following the logic of this thread. There's bias shown towards News Limited teams that is sanctioned by the NRL, and that somehow equates to a bias shown towards the Dragons (a non-News Limited team)?

a) What are you guys on?
b) And can I have some?

[player 1]

Having trouble following the logic of this thread. There's bias shown towards News Limited teams that is sanctioned by the NRL, and that somehow equates to a bias shown towards the Dragons (a non-News Limited team)?

a) What are you guys on?
b) And can I have some?

We know its you Phil.

[Guest]

We know its you Phil.

I guess that's an easier response than actually explaining the logic. Particularly as there isn't any.