If you want proof of corruption in the NRL, watch the Tigers v NQ game

[Inflictor]

Anusley will be right at home defending this - I've seen his BS spinning at his finest - "referees can apply the advantage for as many tackles as they like without penalising - up to 3 sets if necessary" - in relation to Sutton binning Crichton against pamfers.

Annesley is just a puppet.
After what PVL said after Robbo complained about Sutton's corrupt performance against the Panthers I want to hear how he is going to squirm out of this.
Most of the refs F-ups have been because of the fkn dumb rules he's brought about.
I hope the rumours of him getting a job overseas are true. He has fcuked up the game since he arrived. I hope he takes Klein, Cummins and the Sutton clan with him.

[Andrew Walker]

Anusley will be right at home defending this - I've seen his BS spinning at his finest - "referees can apply the advantage for as many tackles as they like without penalising - up to 3 sets if necessary" - in relation to Sutton binning Crichton against pamfers.

As much as he will want to defend the decision I can’t see it happening It is indefensible on two levels The should admit they fcuked up and award the Tigers the win as the game was over. In saying that there is more chance of him defending this than them doing the latter.

[Kramer]

How were they even allowed to challenge?

They challenged a non-decision. I've never seen that.

Absolutely right, the ref didn't stop the play and did not make a call, so how do the Cowboys challenge when no call is made, and the look on Feltds face gives it up as Fatty would say "it's a geeup"

[King Salvo]

Captains can challenge certain decisions and non decisions made by the referee - in this case from a structured restart and during a stoppage in play. If play had continued the Cowboys would not have been able to challenge.

Townsend was saying in the press conference he challenged straight away and the touchie gave the ref the nod as he seen the escort as well - when the ref asked Townsend what he was challenging he said the escort. i.e it met the criteria for a captains challnege

The Tigers player did change direction and thus created the escort situation - whether or not it warranted a penalty is the only issue that can be debated.

Also the Tigers player dd not need to do this as the short kickoff was long.

My understanding was that all clubs were all on board with the captains challenge to avoid the old howler decision and it is in line with most major sports which have a review/challenge system - i.e Tennis/NFL/Baseball/Football etc

It was approved unanimously by the ARL Commission when Todd Greenberg was the NRL CEO

[Andrew Walker]

So now we are meant to believe a player can challenge a referees decision before one is made. This gets better and better

[Inflictor]

Captains can challenge certain decisions and non decisions made by the referee - in this case from a structured restart and during a stoppage in play. If play had continued the Cowboys would not have been able to challenge.

Townsend was saying in the press conference he challenged straight away and the touchie gave the ref the nod as he seen the escort as well - when the ref asked Townsend what he was challenging he said the escort.

The Tigers player did change direction and thus created the escort situation - whether or not it warranted a penalty is the only issue that can be debated.

Also the Tigers player dd not need to do this as the short kickoff was long

Yep the team's captain who just received the dud call is usually the best source for rules interpretation. The coach wasn't so convinced.
I think everyone but you and Townsend think it was an error by the ref allowing the challenge and I think Townsend was taking the piss.

[crikey chris]

Terrible decision.. got done without lube

[Rocky Rhodes]

How were they even allowed to challenge?

They challenged a non-decision. I've never seen that.

Fair point but didn't the call to have a look come from the bunker?

The bunker to have so much influence over games is a real reason for concern.

[Rooster_6]

How were they even allowed to challenge?

They challenged a non-decision. I've never seen that.

“The captain’s challenge was permissible in these circumstances ... Although the referee had blown his whistle to stop the game after the last tackle was completed as time had expired, he had not yet called full-time,” the NRL spokesperson said.

He blew his whilst to stop the game, but not to call full-time.

Turning comical now.

[Rooster_6]

Fair point but didn't the call to have a look come from the bunker?

The bunker to have so much influence over games is a real reason for concern.

No, it was a challenge from Valentine Holmes.

[Rocky Rhodes]

I wonder if Cows coach Todd Payton gonna spray the NRL over bias against the weaker teams this time?

Remember our game vs Cows when the cows got 3 players binned. Bad decisions if you are a good team tend to balance out.

However Payton was right...the weaker teams mostly always get the bad end of the stick.

[Rocky Rhodes]

No, it was a challenge from Valentine Holmes.

So Holmes was in his ear piece? Watch it again...u got any vision?

[TumutChook]

Which is exactly why Smith had every right to call the ref a cheat. Dead set there is no doubt that refs have favourites & even put money on games. Klein was clearly gaining financially out of that game & plain to see

[King Salvo]

Yep the team's captain who just received the dud call is usually the best source for rules interpretation. The coach wasn't so convinced.
I think everyone but you and Townsend think it was an error by the ref allowing the challenge and I think Townsend was taking the piss.

Was it an escort or not

[Inflictor]

Was it an escort or not

It should never have got to that.
I didn't think it was an escort. I thought the cow milked it as much as Milf did on Friday. The officials need to be smarter. The game has become a milk fest.