The ref smashing has returned

[Ray Stehr]

There were a lot of crowd penalties last night, as soon as the crowd started baying for a penalty for inside the 5 sure enough the whistle would blow, it happened 2 or 3 times, fing annoying.

[Spirit of 66]

There were a lot of crowd penalties last night, as soon as the crowd started baying for a penalty for inside the 5 sure enough the whistle would blow, it happened 2 or 3 times, fing annoying.

You're showing your age, Ray. Nobody has been penalised for being inside the 5 since 1993 when they changed it to 10m. (No wait, maybe it does still apply to us...)

[Ray Stehr]

Whatever, 5 or 10 you know what I mean, It really pisses me off.

[The Axe]

There were a lot of crowd penalties last night, as soon as the crowd started baying for a penalty for inside the 5 sure enough the whistle would blow, it happened 2 or 3 times, fing annoying.

Didn't work tonight for Canberra when baying for penalties vs warriors

[chopstiks]

Canberra were always given the benefit of the doubt tonight with their drops being declared warriors strips, yet the opposite wasn't the case, ref's kept assuming warriors dropped theirs. They're guessing .. or whatever. At one point the pocket ref called canberra drop ball, head ref overruled it as a warrior strip, and raiders went on to score. See. The two guys in charge are even disagreeing and a direct result of it is Canberra taking the lead.

[ism22]

Canberra were always given the benefit of the doubt tonight with their drops being declared warriors strips, yet the opposite wasn't the case, ref's kept assuming warriors dropped theirs. They're guessing .. or whatever. At one point the pocket ref called canberra drop ball, head ref overruled it as a warrior strip, and raiders went on to score. See. The two guys in charge are even disagreeing and a direct result of it is Canberra taking the lead.

Didn't watch but that's a pet hate of mine!

Gordon copped a knock-on the other night when he didn't even frigging drop the ball!! He ran like 30m, the tackler tried to strip it... tackler failed then the ref was like 'nah you dropped it and it touched the tackler... so by definition a knock-on because you dropped it forward, it went into his arms then you got it back'. WHAAAAAAT?!? He tried to strip it, pulled it a bit then Gordon grabbed it, maintaining possession the whole time. If there WAS separation then it was due to an unsuccessful strip, with Gordon regaining!

I judge us harshly for our poor form against Newcastle, but thinking back, at least 1/2 of their 'form' was just the refs blowing their whistle outta sympathy.

My pet hate is calling strips knock-ons for one side, but blowing penalties for the other side (usually us) when they put a hand on the attacking player's arm to make sure they don't offload. That's why Brisbane won... they just kept offloading and we weren't allowed to stop them ('HAND ON THE BALL!!!') yes, to stop the effing offload you fool!!!!

[bondi-boy]

Nothing will change until Our Club does something about it.

Media
Legally.

Whatever it takes!

[Spirit of 66]

Of the 7 rounds played, the Roosters have received the least penalties in three of these. It is interesting to see how much our opponents in these rounds have "improved their discipline" compared to their previous week:

Round 7 - Newcastle conceded 1 penalty to the Roosters. Previous week conceded 8.
Round 6 - Brisbane conceded 2 penalties to the Roosters. Previous week conceded 8.
Round 2 - Bulldogs conceded 2 penalties to the Roosters. Previous week conceded 6.

[ism22]

Of the 7 rounds played, the Roosters have received the least penalties in three of these. It is interesting to see how much our opponents in these rounds have "improved their discipline" compared to their previous week:

Round 7 - Newcastle conceded 1 penalty to the Roosters. Previous week conceded 8.
Round 6 - Brisbane conceded 2 penalties to the Roosters. Previous week conceded 8.
Round 2 - Bulldogs conceded 2 penalties to the Roosters. Previous week conceded 6.

Of course, this could be because our ability to milk penalties and win over the crowd is poor.

Not the same thing but during my law degree there were students capable of having a sob then getting great marks because their story (during presentations and I emphasise story rather than technical analysis...etc) won over the lecturer's heart.

Example, one reasonably attractive woman told a story about a friend being raped and started crying, and stuttering her speech...etc. Another one just had a ramble about how a boyfriend has betrayed her trust by sharing revenge porn of her doing sexual stuff (all described to us so innocently... trying to win us over). Both got full marks and a standing ovation for their 'bravery'. I did a highly technical presentation and pushed out a distinction on the fact I'd done so much research that they couldn't fault me THAT much. However, the markers were far more defensive/technical when picking on my analysis, and picked up a lot of niggling points of argument because while my presentation was technically quite good, I didn't win them over or make them shed tears about it.

Different situation I know but same in that it's an independent adjudicator assessing our performance. IMO the Chooks don't have players/stories that win over the crowd. QLD Origin? IMO that's 90% of why they do the whole pre-game... 'they said I was too small and too much touble haahahahahah look at me now I'm JT !!' [insert dramatic music]. If you can win over the hearts of the refs then IMO you give yourself an edge. I think we need to put some serious effort into putting on a better 'show' when we are at home, in order to bring out the emotions.

[The Axe]

Ism. How many players have we used over how many seasons. I cannot recall one that won the refs.

I notice Maloney no longer concedes penalties

[stringaz]

Burn, baby burn

[Spirit of 66]

Of course, this could be because our ability to milk penalties and win over the crowd is poor.

Not the same thing but during my law degree there were students capable of having a sob then getting great marks because their story (during presentations and I emphasise story rather than technical analysis...etc) won over the lecturer's heart.

Example, one reasonably attractive woman told a story about a friend being raped and started crying, and stuttering her speech...etc. Another one just had a ramble about how a boyfriend has betrayed her trust by sharing revenge porn of her doing sexual stuff (all described to us so innocently... trying to win us over). Both got full marks and a standing ovation for their 'bravery'. I did a highly technical presentation and pushed out a distinction on the fact I'd done so much research that they couldn't fault me THAT much. However, the markers were far more defensive/technical when picking on my analysis, and picked up a lot of niggling points of argument because while my presentation was technically quite good, I didn't win them over or make them shed tears about it.

Different situation I know but same in that it's an independent adjudicator assessing our performance. IMO the Chooks don't have players/stories that win over the crowd. QLD Origin? IMO that's 90% of why they do the whole pre-game... 'they said I was too small and too much touble haahahahahah look at me now I'm JT !!' [insert dramatic music]. If you can win over the hearts of the refs then IMO you give yourself an edge. I think we need to put some serious effort into putting on a better 'show' when we are at home, in order to bring out the emotions.

So it IS our fault that we don't get penalties? That our captains should refrain from presenting academic dissertations to the referees about the triple markers and slowing down the ruck and instead engage the hearts of referees through the judicious use of classical oratory? Maybe show them pictures of sad-eyed kittens?

Is it too much to ask that referees do their job, dispassionately, without bias and without the influence of the crowd? In what other sport is "winning over the crowd" to distort referees' interpretation of the rules an acceptable coaching strategy?

[Tommy Smith]

How about this as another way of putting our current penalties plight:

We've received a grand total of 1 penalty in the last 3 halves of football and that was for an accidental offside.

So zero ruck or infringement penalties received in 120 minutes of football.

Ahahaha AHAHA

AHAHA AHAHHAHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAA

Hey if we don't laugh we'll just cry ourselves to sleep over that kind of stat.

I defy anyone to tell me that the refs aren't deliberately targeting us. To tell me that Archer, Cummins, Badger and co don't personally have a vendetta against us.

[bigben]

Copy from my FaceBook Post after 6 rounds in 2015 >>>>.Roosters 2015 Penalty Stats .
.
Round 1 ----2 penalties in the first half-----0 in the 2nd half
Round 2 ---2 penalties in the first half -----2 in the 2nd half
Round 3----4 penalties in the first half -----1 in the 2nd half
Round 4 ---2 penalties in the first half -----4 in the 2nd half
Round 5 ---2 penalties in the first half -----2 in the 2nd half.
Round 6----5 penalties in the first half -----0 in the 2nd half
Total 26 penalties ..Average around 4 penalties per game .......
Roosters Have Not Won a Penalty Count This Year After 6 Rounds.
Just for the record Cronulla have received 53 penalties thus far compared to The Roosters 26..

[Jacks Fur Coat]

So it IS our fault that we don't get penalties? That our captains should refrain from presenting academic dissertations to the referees about the triple markers and slowing down the ruck and instead engage the hearts of referees through the judicious use of classical oratory? Maybe show them pictures of sad-eyed kittens?

Is it too much to ask that referees do their job, dispassionately, without bias and without the influence of the crowd? In what other sport is "winning over the crowd" to distort referees' interpretation of the rules an acceptable coaching strategy?

Love your work 66...judicious use of classical oratory is beyond the pale for most RL lads.

Pics of sad eyed kittens? Cam Smith tried it once I think.