did uncle nick call on gus in the PR war with the refs

[fletch]

Gus did a big article in this mornings SMH breaking down all the incidents over the entire 80 mins, highlighting the soft in nature penalties manly were receiving, while also highlighting the numerous times we should have been awarded a penalty.

he did however highlight the fact that although the penalties would have helped our cause we did continually shot ourselves in the foot with our poor handling.

this article certainly flies in the face of his commentary on Friday night, you certainly get the feeling Uncle Nick might be working behind the scenes here.

the article is too long to post here, just head to smh.com.au, its an interesting read in particular the time stamp section detailing each penalty/questionable decision.

[Hawkeye]

He made one blaring mistake though.
He said the no penalty for Pearce's late/high tackle made no difference because Hiku lost the ball and we got the scrum feed ....as I remember it, Hiku lost the ball 10mtrs out, but it hit Mini's hand and went into touch and manly got the feed. That was a huge call as it would've given us 6 tackles 10mtrs out, but instead Manly run the ball out from their danger end !

[bondi-boy]

The penalty count was 11-2 in favour of Manly.
We were 'robbed', it's as simple as that.

[Guest]

The penalty count was 11-2 in favour of Manly.
We were 'robbed', it's as simple as that.

No we weren't.

[Darkone]

The penalty count was 11-2 in favour of Manly.
We were 'robbed', it's as simple as that.

Our halves also had the night off

Our one percenters are non existent

[bondi-boy]

No we weren't.

Oh yes we were!

[Guest]

Oh yes we were!

No. We weren't.

Getting the rough end of the stick and getting robbed are two completely different things.

[Jacks Fur Coat]

No. We weren't.

Getting the rough end of the stick and getting robbed are two completely different things.

Yes they are but I think the latter applied in this case.

You might find an ally in Sausage Fingers on this one Kegs but not many more.

[Johnny.]

No. We weren't.

Getting the rough end of the stick and getting robbed are two completely different things.

Yes, one involves getting a sharp stick up your arse and the other involves someone stealing your wallet.

[Guest]

Yes they are but I think the latter applied in this case.

You might find an ally in Sausage Fingers on this one Kegs but not many more.

Hey JFC, I am not looking for any form of ally here.

I am prepared to admit, that we were royally shafted on Friday night, worse than i've seen in a long time. But i'll be f*cked if i'm going to fall into this 'The NRL is corrupt' conspiracy theorist crap.

Friday night was a combination of the refs reading and believing the pre-conceived ideas of Easts being noted for giving penalties away and a good old fashioned square up for the rub of the green we got in the GF.

Quite frankly, i am more than happy to accept what we got on Friday night in exchange for a premiership.

We were not robbed of anything.

[milanja]

He made one blaring mistake though.
He said the no penalty for Pearce's late/high tackle made no difference because Hiku lost the ball and we got the scrum feed ....as I remember it, Hiku lost the ball 10mtrs out, but it hit Mini's hand and went into touch and manly got the feed. That was a huge call as it would've given us 6 tackles 10mtrs out, but instead Manly run the ball out from their danger end !

Nah we got that feed hawkeye, ball went into touch from hiku.

I mentioned this yesterday, if they think just because we got possession, then that overruled the penalty, it is wrong. With a penalty we would of got the ball from a set play from where the ball lands, which allows a few different options, including a shot at goal, which we probably would not have taken, but we were not given that opportunity.

[Spirit of 66]

Hey JFC, I am not looking for any form of ally here.

I am prepared to admit, that we were royally shafted on Friday night, worse than i've seen in a long time. But i'll be f*cked if i'm going to fall into this 'The NRL is corrupt' conspiracy theorist crap.

Friday night was a combination of the refs reading and believing the pre-conceived ideas of Easts being noted for giving penalties away and a good old fashioned square up for the rub of the green we got in the GF.

Quite frankly, i am more than happy to accept what we got on Friday night in exchange for a premiership.

We were not robbed of anything.

How is a referee providing "a good old fashion square up" not corruption?

[Andrew Walker]

How is a referee providing "a good old fashion square up" not corruption?

Cant wait to hear the fools response to your question

[Guest]

How is a referee providing "a good old fashion square up" not corruption?

Corrupt: having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain.

Not only was Cummins acting very honest in giving penalties to Manly and not many to us, but what does Cummins gain from 'evening the penalty count up', like so many of you claim referees do?

And can any of you theorists provide hard evidence that Cummins, or any ref for that matter, are receiving money, or any sort of gain, in return?!?

[bondi-boy]

How is a referee providing "a good old fashion square up" not corruption?

Good question.

Surely engineering the result of a match, any match, is indeed match-fixing.
It's match-fixing in cricket, so therefore it must also be match-fixing in RL, eh?

Match-fixing is a criminal offence.

Anyone who thinks they're above the law should take a drive out to the prison and ask Michael Williamson, former ALP President and former HSU boss all about it.

Ask Marcus Einfeld...he did wonderful things for humanity, but still finished up in prison.

With his trousers rolled up he walked through the muddy, soiled with human waste streets of Toomelah crying tears of shame and pity.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/...770924233.html

Tall, patrician, with Cecil B. De Mille-epic looks ready-made for the night's television news, Einfeld put Toomelah's plight on the front page.

The son of a Wran government minister, Einfeld faces perjury and traffic charges.
Back then, he was a famed human rights activist who, in 1963, his eyes welling with tears, had stood among 200,000 people at the Washington Monument listening to Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" address.

Fourteen years later, Einfeld cried at Toomelah, too, as Aborigines testified to their disadvantage. "It is beyond belief that Australian citizens could be asked to live in those circumstances," he said at the end of the first day's hearings.