Todd Greenberg is a fool

[Nathan Aboud]

You think Uncle Nick could help out with the $160K fine????

[ism22]

Mr Articulate - Sterlo hit the nail on the head tonight.

It's perfectly understandable that coaches go into press conferences within half-an-hour of a game ending, fairly fired up & adrenaline still pumping BUT, all Flanagan had to do from the go get was preface his comments along the lines of............"unfortunately we committed more mistakes than our opposition today OR our ball control and uncharacteristic completion rate didn't help us etc..............
It's called tact and that Shire bogan doesn't know a thing about it.

Suck it up both Manly & Cronulla...........karma's a bitch.
Manly fans remember the hand of Foran in 2011 (or 2012) major semi against the Cowboys!
Peptide fans remember the winning try off the 7th tackle ironically against the Cowboys too! At the time coach Flanagan said, "these things happen". LOL

Thing is... Flanno wasn't fired up and angry. He had carefully set out 10 dot points and intended to list out 10 situations where he thought the refs got it wrong. On top of this he clearly said:
- No, nobody's paying the refs and I'm not gonna go into theories about corruption (i.e. the refs aren't bent, they were just incompetent)
- The game was awesome and both teams played really good footy

I hate the Sharks, but IMO Flanno was well within his rights to question 10 calls in a thorough and methodocal manner. My issue is when:
- They go and call the system corrupt (that's my job!!!)
- They drag players into it (like he did by constantly naming Lewis and Maloney as disgruntled players... have some chivalry about it!!!)
- They bring up old wounds and attack people who weren't even out there. For example, Gal had a shot at Cords for 'milking' a penalty. Lets be frank... if you can't beat the Cowboys then you can't beat the Broncos! Cords had locked in a preliminary final for his team and he's an Origin buddy of Gal's. This was a DISGRACE ad had nothing to do with his loss that night!!! Only a true dog of a character will go and attack his mate like that (and TWICE!!)
- They say the other team didn't deserve to win (which he didn't do). I'm the most one-eyed fan and I reckon here's where you draw the line... watching the tennis, the higher performing players ALWAYS make sure they shake their opponent's hand properly, congratulate them on their win and let them enjoy their win. As a professional I think you have to respect that even if the refs got something wrong, your opponent had no control over that. All they did was play their best, so don't attack them!! You woulda taken the win if the refs had called your way and woulda expected them to be courteous towards you... it's a matter of respect and professionalism towards your peers.

[The Lip]

You think Uncle Nick could help out with the $160K fine????

careful with the extra questions marks Nathan - you dont want this to blow out further. They seem to be really cracking down on this sort of thing lately.

[mightyrooster]

careful with the extra questions marks Nathan - you dont want this to blow out further. They seem to be really cracking down on this sort of thing lately.

Lol. I wonder what happened to the Oracle? He was the master of multiple question marks and exclamation marks and Chookpen tanties.

Those were the days.

[novice chook]

You think Uncle Nick could help out with the $160K fine????

Nick assist Moanly and the Peptide Kings out of a hole - I doubt it. I suspect he has no love for either club. Scott Penn can pay for Moanly and Eddie Hayson can tip in for the Peptide Kings.

[roosterchook]

Pretty good idea. What do you think?
Would the appeal be using the bunker to review the on field decision? Could the bunkers decision to overrule be appealed - tough one I guess who would review the bunker?
if a decision of try or no try is absolutely impossible to make with no conclusive vision, who would get the benefit of the doubt? Tough one that also.
Lastly, who would appeal? The attacking team or the defending team?

Im starting to see how complex these decision appeal systems or processes could get....

what do you guys think?

I think appeals are most useful where the bunker hasn't been referred to.

[Dummy half]

They need to bring back benefit of the doubt and give it to the attacking team, for example the taumalolo try: nobody could see clearly if it was grounded, so benefit of the doubt to the cows, no-one can argue that, it's a try, move on.

[4 the all in brawl]

That press conference was a joke as no matter how much PR he puts behind it, it is the truth....

Those officials including his bunker did determine the outcome of 3 of the 4 games on the weekend, now if we lost I'm sure Robbo would have made it 4 out of 4 with the no try to Latrell but however the officials missing the drop ball by Corey Oates.

The referee's have all off season including the 26 rounds to get it right and to continue to make those errors in the most important game of the year it is disgusting. I still can't see as to why Sutton needed to go to the bunker when his touch judges and also pocket referee said Walker was fine onside and that it was good.

Greenberg really is a tool in a job that he should not be in anymore........

So how they can get more people refereeing in games then they allow coaches to open slather on refs after games?

I get coaches blowing up after howlers but those games on the weekend the possibly incorrect calls were in the main 50/50 ones.

[4 the all in brawl]

I think appeals are most useful where the bunker hasn't been referred to.

Agree..
Yeah u cannot appeal the bunkers call to ??? The bunker, defies logic.
However its the broadcssters and betting has now led us down this path of video scrutiny for almost anything leading up to a try apart from a forward pass. I wished they would do away with the technology it actually leaves a more sour taste than otherwise.
One ref and second ref is video and show replays at normal speed. Ref can refer and say i dont know please check and the benefit of the doubt goes to attacking team.
And the refs boss appears on a weekly show on foxtel to.discuss the issues with a. studio audience Q and A style with the other refs getting grilled by audience maybe a different coach too each week and from the twitterverse.

I reckon it would be fascinating and watch the unconscious bias get less. Especially if the refs boss.and his charges are subject.to an open forum.and questions from online too.

[Mickie Lane]

Theres only one way to improve this situation and that's to allow player appeals. 3 per team per match. Only when a try is disputed. It could help a hell of a lot to get some wrong tries reversed before the game is lost as well as reduce tensions between players, coaches & refs. Tennis and cricket use this system and it doesn't take away from the enjoyability of the game at all.

A refereee is not infallible but when you look at all the hard work a team puts in all year, imagine if we get eliminated on a wrong ref call? These situations need to be corrected on field as much as possible before a wrong result has come about due to ref error.

Reviewing something as crucial as a try, penalty try, sin bin or send of is a must because these decisions are game breakers. Strong evidence needs to replace emotion.

Mate trust me its not the way to go.There is no perfection.
The more rules you add the more problems you have.
1 ref, no mikes & no bunker is what they need to do.