Sack JWH...

[Guest]

Sometimes penalties are given because players sail close to the wind repeatedly, and then finally the ref has had enough and blows one. Like in a set where you can see for 2 or 3 tackles in a row the defence are laying on the tackled player just a little bit too long, and you just know that if they do it once more in that set there'll be penalty, whereas if that was the only time they did it it wouldn't be a penalty on its own. For all we know he was sailing close to the wind

I like him as a player, but penalties kill teams nowadays, and he gives away too many.

Any suggestion though that this penalty (or JWH himself) cost is the game is absurd. The main reason we lose games is because we can't score points, and for that the halves must shoulder most of the blame

If that was the case, the Dragons should get penalised in every defensive set of 6 and get pinged for a forward pass every attacking set of 6. They sail very close to the wind EVERY set of 6.

[Guest]

The part in bold, thats the thing that irks me, Why shoud refs give warnings? when do the warnings stop? Do some players get more warnings than others.

if refs want players to stop pushing the boundaries then penalise them first up.

We all hear the refs warning the teams to get on side. and they warn them for 3 tackles, by that time, the defence has done it's job in stifling the attack and 4th tackle they are on side but the attack is done, over, dead.

If they infringe the rules, penalise. i would be happy if they did this for all teams consistantly, it may mean more penalties to begin with, but then it may mean the players learn and put in the effort NOT to make these simple mistakes.

It's not an exact science. Unless you want the video ref making calls on whether teams are back 10 or on how long someone lays on the tackled player, it has to be a feel thing to some extent. To use holding down as an example, there isn't a stopwatch that starts when the ref tells them to get off. He's telling them to get off, and for a tackle or 2 they are a millisecond slow in doing so. On the next tackle you can sense that unless they actually show that they are listening, and make an extra effort to get off at least on time or maybe even early, it'll be a penalty. And fair enough.

The same thing happens with the markers - you see a team get a quick play the ball and the dummy half makes some metres and gets another quick play the play the ball. If the markers are half a step late in getting square but have made a genuine effort the ref will usually let that go. But if the same thing happens at the very next play the ball, the refs will say you had your chance, and blow it up. Fair enough.

And it's the same for all teams. You see Melbourne push the envelope with the wrestling and holding down, but they don't do it for 3 tackles in a row.

They're smart - we're unfortunately dumb

[supermario]

On issues like holding down and subjective calls like that, yes it is not an exact science and yes there is leway into this fair enough.

Point i am getting at is, there are rules that should not be subjective and no be open to warnings. the 10 meters for example, it is clear, the referee marks where the players need to be, the players MUST be in line with the referee. That is the law of the game, there is no subjectivity to it, the referee must mark 10 meters and the defence must retreat with him. if people start complaining that the game is getting too fast, rather than tinker with dominant tackle rules.....move the defence closer, make it 5 mtrs, put the emphasis on the attack to create the opportunities. thats just an example mind you.

You example regarding the marker, yeah fair enough...except when players consistantly do it, albeit not 4 or 5 times in a row, but may times during a match.

There just seem like there is too much subjectivity in refereeing desicions and that is what is causing the angst and anger towards the referees.

break it down, bring it back to basics and rule to the rule book and you will see an increas in consistancy in desicions made during matches.

[Guest]

On issues like holding down and subjective calls like that, yes it is not an exact science and yes there is leway into this fair enough.

Point i am getting at is, there are rules that should not be subjective and no be open to warnings. the 10 meters for example, it is clear, the referee marks where the players need to be, the players MUST be in line with the referee. That is the law of the game, there is no subjectivity to it, the referee must mark 10 meters and the defence must retreat with him. if people start complaining that the game is getting too fast, rather than tinker with dominant tackle rules.....move the defence closer, make it 5 mtrs, put the emphasis on the attack to create the opportunities. thats just an example mind you.

You example regarding the marker, yeah fair enough...except when players consistantly do it, albeit not 4 or 5 times in a row, but may times during a match.

There just seem like there is too much subjectivity in refereeing desicions and that is what is causing the angst and anger towards the referees.

break it down, bring it back to basics and rule to the rule book and you will see an increas in consistancy in desicions made during matches.

Keeping them back the 10 has to be a bit subjective, simply because the refs can't tell for sure if one of the 10 or so defenders in the line that they have to try and watch simultaneously is 6 inches ahead of the others. If they suspect someone is doing it, they'll cut them a tiny bit of slack and then blow it up if they do it again. Most of the players (or at least our players) are so dumb that if they get away with something for one tackle they'll do it again straight away, rather than play smart and tow the line for a few tackles.

Listen to sports ears at a game and you'll hear the refs discussing particular players and asking "Did you tell him?" and then saying things to players like "He told you to get back last set, you had your chance"

Unless you want the defenders back the 10 to be let out of starting barriers like racehorses when the ball is played this is the way it has to be

Yes there'll be mistakes from the refs but that's always been the case. It's the same rules for everyone. If this effects us negatively, that's the fault of our coaching staff and our players, not the refs. We should learn to play smart, like the St George's and the Melbourne's do. Then we'd have other fans saying "Why do the Roosters always get away with this and that and get the slack from the officials" instead of us whining about other teams getting the breaks

[supermario]

i just want to preface my next comments tony by saying, my comments are regarding refereeing as a whole, not just related to the roosters situation.

the point i am trying to make is that we need to remove as much of the subjectiveness from the game. it allows too much questioning of the officials and too many inconsistansies in the refereeing of a match.

yes, in some areas, you cannot avoid being subjective, but in other areas, things can be done to assist in the inforcement of these rules.

the other thing to consider is the players, they exploit the subjectiveness of the rules, they don't listen to warnings and in most cases by the time a penalty is blown, that players team has reaped the rewards of the stretching of the rules.

It may sound a bit old school, but if the refs want respect, and not just respect because they wear a pink shirt, but respect for making the right and consistant calls, the refs need to rule to the rule book and when needed use common sense when making subjective desicions.

I agree, there will always be mistakes, they are human, they can reduce these mistakes though, a hard line stance will cause the players to listen to the referee, or they will be faced with penalties.

[Guest]

The standard of refereeing can be summed up by two things, 1 that we are genuinely discussing a square up decision in a professional football code and 2 that the referees are a point of discussion every week in a professional football code

[Pass the Ball]

Referees are only discussed by losing teams supporters each week...

NASA are working on a cyborg to take over reffing the NRL, but until then we have to put up with humans doing the job...

[Guest]

well we've had plenty to talk about this year!

I would prefer if JWH didnt give away as many penalties but I am happy to have him in the team for entertainment value

[Vasco]

Referees are only discussed by losing teams supporters each week...

NASA are working on a cyborg to take over reffing the NRL, but until then we have to put up with humans doing the job...

Until our brains are controlled by NASA we will continue to talk about other humans that make mistakes.

[Rooster_6]

I like Hargreaves at lock to be honest, he's currently a much better defender than he is at taking hitups and he's allowed to chose when to take his hitups from lock + he can play a little wider.

I think he's shown more composure when starting, not that his penalties were overly bad especially the second one where he was just fighting to get a quick play the ball and could of easily received a penalty himself.

He shouldn't of played first grade last year and he probably shouldn't be a full time first grader this year either. I think next year we'll start to see some really good performances and in the following years he'll start to become more consistent with his footy.

[Guest]

i agree i thinks his more a backrower then a prop but i just love having him in the team...
his the perfect player to ruffel up a few feathers

He will get better in time but so will our whole team still very young!!

[Billy Gunn]

He has been one of the few positives this season, he has morley's power and crocker like aggression

[Guest]

I like Hargreaves at lock to be honest, he's currently a much better defender than he is at taking hitups and he's allowed to chose when to take his hitups from lock + he can play a little wider.

I think he's shown more composure when starting, not that his penalties were overly bad especially the second one where he was just fighting to get a quick play the ball and could of easily received a penalty himself.

He shouldn't of played first grade last year and he probably shouldn't be a full time first grader this year either. I think next year we'll start to see some really good performances and in the following years he'll start to become more consistent with his footy.

I used to like it when Morley played lock. I never thought carting the ball up through the middle on the first or second was his strength, though he did the job admirably. JWH is a similar type of player (also gets a lot of unfair attention from the refs). Hopefully he develops to be in the same class.

[Headless Chook]

Just back on the referee subject, my pet hate is the penalties for things like being a metre offside from the kick off, or penalties for not taking the drop out on the line. Why be so pedantic with things that have very little effect on the game, yet at the same time we see markers and other players being told to stay out of the play because they're offside. If they're in the defensive line they are in play....they can't then pull out of it. If you're going to penalise somebody for pinching a half a metre from a restart, penalise everybody who's offside.

[ROC181]

Just back on the referee subject, my pet hate is the penalties for things like being a metre offside from the kick off, or penalties for not taking the drop out on the line. Why be so pedantic with things that have very little effect on the game, yet at the same time we see markers and other players being told to stay out of the play because they're offside. If they're in the defensive line they are in play....they can't then pull out of it. If you're going to penalise somebody for pinching a half a metre from a restart, penalise everybody who's offside.

HC...but where do you stop? The lines are there and it should be adhered to. The scrums shit me but it's not the refs fault it's the teams fault for not practising them enough. I wish scrums would be contested as it gives the other team, like the Roosters v West Tigers game last year, a chance to regain and win the game but that's just me coming from a union background.