Two things from the eels/drizzle game

[Spirit of 66]

I've lived long enough to see the Roosters win 6 premierships and hopefully I'll see a few more. Other than that, I'd dearly love one day to see us win a penalty count 8 to 1.

[player 1]

I've lived long enough to see the Roosters win 6 premierships and hopefully I'll see a few more. Other than that, I'd dearly love one day to see us win a penalty count 8 to 1.

2002 prelim final against Broncos we won penalties 9-1.

[Spirit of 66]

2002 prelim final against Broncos we won penalties 9-1.

Excellent. My life is complete!

[SupermanSupportsEasts4Eva]

Storm's NASolomona got off with a grade 1 careless high tackle and a small fine. No further comment needed.

That decision is just ridiculous.

[SupermanSupportsEasts4Eva]

Every team throughout a season will cry poor about inconsistent decisions. (IMO we cop a harder go more than other teams, whereas Souffs always seem to get the match defining calls).
The fact that it happens so much is definitely a low blight on the game. So Mr V'landys if you want to give the refs some credibility back than how about introducing a match review committee to review ref decisions.
Following every round get a former player and a former ref to re-watch games highlighting the inconsistencies. Then show it to the refs so it is front and centre of their thinking. Get them to explain why they were inconsistent with their decisions for both teams during that game. They don't need to publish the results or make it public knowledge, but do it so that they know they are being assessed. Make it part of their KPIs. Once you start making them answer for their inconsistencies it will soon be irradiated from the game.

[Johnny Brass]

Every team throughout a season will cry poor about inconsistent decisions. (IMO we cop a harder go more than other teams, whereas Souffs always seem to get the match defining calls).
The fact that it happens so much is definitely a low blight on the game. So Mr V'landys if you want to give the refs some credibility back than how about introducing a match review committee to review ref decisions.
Following every round get a former player and a former ref to re-watch games highlighting the inconsistencies. Then show it to the refs so it is front and centre of their thinking. Get them to explain why they were inconsistent with their decisions for both teams during that game. They don't need to publish the results or make it public knowledge, but do it so that they know they are being assessed. Make it part of their KPIs. Once you start making them answer for their inconsistencies it will soon be irradiated from the game.

Brilliant suggestion and one that should be looked into too make them more accountable. I know in gridiron they have an ex official as part of the telecast explaining the pros and cons of important decisions.

[Headless Chook]

Every team throughout a season will cry poor about inconsistent decisions. (IMO we cop a harder go more than other teams, whereas Souffs always seem to get the match defining calls).
The fact that it happens so much is definitely a low blight on the game. So Mr V'landys if you want to give the refs some credibility back than how about introducing a match review committee to review ref decisions.
Following every round get a former player and a former ref to re-watch games highlighting the inconsistencies. Then show it to the refs so it is front and centre of their thinking. Get them to explain why they were inconsistent with their decisions for both teams during that game. They don't need to publish the results or make it public knowledge, but do it so that they know they are being assessed. Make it part of their KPIs. Once you start making them answer for their inconsistencies it will soon be irradiated from the game.

Pretty sure they already do something like this.

[The Skeez]

Storm's NASolomona got off with a grade 1 careless high tackle and a small fine. No further comment needed.

I think its fair enough. I’d be filthy if that happened to any of our players. Nelson is 6’6” and can’t disappear, as good a reason not to run at him.

[ROC181]

I think its fair enough. I’d be filthy if that happened to any of our players. Nelson is 6’6” and can’t disappear, as good a reason not to run at him.

The most crucial defence for NAS would have been that Welch got the Parra player before NAS got him which would have added the possibility that Welch tackle contributed to NAS hit.

[The Skeez]

Parra play for penalties. Hayne was the worst

They’ve been doing it for years.
Brad Arthur is particularly bad with his ‘use’ of the head bin and middle forwards coming off the field for assessments around the time when they might normally need a break.

[roostermcgregor]

"Originally posted by ROC181

The most crucial defence for NAS would have been that Welch got the Parra player before NAS got him which would have added the possibility that Welch tackle contributed to NAS hit."

I dunno about that ROC.
The way that I saw it was that Welch had him going sideways . NAS lined the player up, and hit it with the shoulder, right in the head. Looked completely intentional , to cause the maximum amount of damage to the head. NAS didn't even have his arm in a position to wrap it around the player & it was never an intention to make a tackle. Welch contributed in that the Parra player had nowhere to go, or couldn't change direction. Its one of the worst incidents I have seen this year, and deserved a minimum 4 week suspension.Yet the NRL didn't even cite NAS.

Why is that the case?- its because the whole NRL is a sham and a circus, and has its agenda, which is:
Give Parra & Souths a leg up with penalties and 6 again calls ( to the tune of 8-1 each game) because these are the "Pet " sides in the comp. You need to keep the NRL fanbase happy, and you need to do it, especially for these teams .Make sure they make the finals, and then go a long way during the ride.
We have a mention on this post that referees Sutton & Klien are absolute c.unts. They are, along with Ben Cummins,(who kept the Raiders alive in the 2019 GF through 15 dubious calls in favour of the Raiders) have been instructed by the NRL to ensure the Roosters don't achieve the 3 peat.
Next on the list is the Storm - they are the team "most likely", so you don't want to disadvantage them in any way, by suspending their players. Hell no, let them do what they want, no repercussions. They are prime to de-throne the Roosters as Champs, especially with some help.
And the Roosters? Do everything in your power to stop the domination. Rule penalties against them. Rule 6 more tackles when they touch the ball, and even if they don't make a play for it, because that's all subjective and no one will know, anyway. Hell, 6 again ruck calls are also subjective. So are loose carries, Knock-ons and Knock backs Offside calls. Strips. Hand in the ruck. Cane these bastards, and make sure they don't win again. F#Ck, we could loose tens of thousands of fans following other clubs in the NRL, because they are sick of waiting for success. As Gus Gould says " When the Roosters lose, its good for the game...."

Following 2018 & 2019 when our side dominated, we have come back to the field.
Because of this , and because momentum shifts are now mare easily managed by the referees, we have a mountain to climb to win the 2020 title. I don't even think we can do it.