Elimination Final: Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks vs. Canberra Raiders Saturday 3rd October 5:40pm @ GIO Stadium Canberra

bort

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
30,583
Reaction score
6,392
Location
IN A BAR
snowman said:
I dont buy that at all. Fifita fell asleep on top of wighton to reset our line

No one reset though, smart from the Raiders, dumb by us, again
Click to expand...

I think that was the tackle off a Ronnie dropped ball and Fifi gave penalty because we wanted to review the dropped ball. Couldn't review it being called play on so Fifi gave penalty, that's why he Graham and even a couple others were all shouting challenge straight away. What Fifi did was a penalty for sure and not what they wanted the bunker to actually look at.

So not just Wade but Fifi and I assume probably the whole team obviously (incorrectly) though concede any penalty and we can try get the Ronnie dropped ball overturned.

Did think it was pretty poor by the ref when 'explaining' to Wade why he let it happen and his second point was it was tapped before any challenge was made as that was strictly not true. Although this doesn't impact anything, how could ref not have known we were challenging at that point.
 
Tiger Shark

Tiger Shark

Jaws
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
9,007
Reaction score
912
Location
Sydney
snowman said:
Refs have allowed quick taps for ruck infringements, most teams have generally taken the 2 though

And atkins never once waived time on, he was waving play on
Click to expand...

The amount of times refs have stopped players who are outside of the 10m from taking quick taps is numerous.

They should have played to the whistle, not the first time we've been caught out like that but let's not pretend that hasn't been stopped by refs to tap it again this season. It's the consistency that fuggin annoys me.
 
Tiger Shark

Tiger Shark

Jaws
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
9,007
Reaction score
912
Location
Sydney
And how is Bateman's not anything but a trip ? Seemed pretty blatant to me.

What's the MRC charge for a trip ?
 
bort

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
30,583
Reaction score
6,392
Location
IN A BAR
Tiger Shark said:
And how is Bateman's not anything but a trip ? Seemed pretty blatant to me.

What's the MRC charge for a trip ?
Click to expand...

Nah just fine Katoa and Talakai and call it a day apparently
Obviously wasn't a path to charge him and not see him miss a week
 
Super Impose

Super Impose

Great White
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
4,732
Reaction score
784
Location
The Hill
Tiger Shark said:
The amount of times refs have stopped players who are outside of the 10m from taking quick taps is numerous.

They should have played to the whistle, not the first time we've been caught out like that but let's not pretend that hasn't been stopped by refs to tap it again this season. It's the consistency that fuggin annoys me.
Click to expand...

If there have not been challenges for ruck infringements this year - then I will give it up - Annessley is talking out of his backside ..
 
Milkshark

Milkshark

Great White
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
4,918
Reaction score
681
snowman said:
Only the attacking team can challenge a ruck infringement
Click to expand...
How often would that happen.

I really don’t like the 6 again rule, let’s too many teams get the upper hand and without and reason given to the other team, you just have to cop on the chin
 
Western Sharkie

Western Sharkie

Jaws
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,450
Reaction score
3,896
Location
Perth WA
ILLmac said:
How often would that happen.

I really don’t like the 6 again rule, let’s too many teams get the upper hand and without and reason given to the other team, you just have to cop on the chin
Click to expand...

I like the concept but I think it is way to grey an area to be accurately and fairly policed.
It is very much open to individual interpretation by the ref and they can call them on the run so it’s difficult to know why it’s called or if it was legit or not.
I’m not suggesting the refs are purposely cheating but it’s very difficult to monitor the call and prove either way as it stands.
 
BurgoShark

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
bort said:
I think that was the tackle off a Ronnie dropped ball and Fifi gave penalty because we wanted to review the dropped ball. Couldn't review it being called play on so Fifi gave penalty, that's why he Graham and even a couple others were all shouting challenge straight away. What Fifi did was a penalty for sure and not what they wanted the bunker to actually look at.

So not just Wade but Fifi and I assume probably the whole team obviously (incorrectly) though concede any penalty and we can try get the Ronnie dropped ball overturned.

Did think it was pretty poor by the ref when 'explaining' to Wade why he let it happen and his second point was it was tapped before any challenge was made as that was strictly not true. Although this doesn't impact anything, how could ref not have known we were challenging at that point.
Click to expand...

I agree with this last part. Ref claimed there was no challenge before the tap, which was incorrect. NRL/Annesley failed to acknowledge or address this part of it

It would be nice to have had a clear explanation as to how this will be dealt with in future. i.e. if the next time a captain asks for a challenge of a non-challengeable offence ... will the ref flat out ignore him or will he provide an explanation? I’m happy to cop the call from a Sharks PoV but as an NRL fan this doesn’t really clarify anything or give me any confidence that it will applied in the same way the next time it happens.

I’d also be curious to know if the captain’s challenge rule extends to the Ronaldo drop. If Wade was in fact challenging that there was a strip then we are in a very grey area. Technically if it was a strip their then if falls to the first offence and the ruck penalty doesn’t exist anymore. Again - something the NRL didn’t clear up.
 
bort

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
30,583
Reaction score
6,392
Location
IN A BAR
burgess1978 said:
I agree with this last part. Ref claimed there was no challenge before the tap, which was incorrect. NRL/Annesley failed to acknowledge or address this part of it

It would be nice to have had a clear explanation as to how this will be dealt with in future. i.e. if the next time a captain asks for a challenge of a non-challengeable offence ... will the ref flat out ignore him or will he provide an explanation? I’m happy to cop the call from a Sharks PoV but as an NRL fan this doesn’t really clarify anything or give me any confidence that it will applied in the same way the next time it happens.

I’d also be curious to know if the captain’s challenge rule extends to the Ronaldo drop. If Wade was in fact challenging that there was a strip then we are in a very grey area. Technically if it was a strip their then if falls to the first offence and the ruck penalty doesn’t exist anymore. Again - something the NRL didn’t clear up.
Click to expand...

I believe the bunker can review the entire play but I do think it was high risk as I actually doubt the bunker would have rewound that far and reviewed the whole play (unless Graham had really pushed he wanted it looked at and been lucky), but that is what I think the motivation was, an intentional penalty by Fifi to get the chance to try and get the ball back. It would make no sense at all to think you were any shot of getting that penalty by Fifi overturned.
 
C

CHOGM

Great White
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
4,555
Reaction score
269
snowman said:
Refs have allowed quick taps for ruck infringements, most teams have generally taken the 2 though

And atkins never once waived time on, he was waving play on
Click to expand...
But he was waiving it after the tap wasn’t he? Why wasn’t he waiving play on before the tap, Instead of responding to the sharks players?
 
bort

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
30,583
Reaction score
6,392
Location
IN A BAR
CHOGM said:
But he was waiving it after the tap wasn’t he? Why wasn’t he waiving play on before the tap, Instead of responding to the sharks players?
Click to expand...

Yeah the ball was live and they tapped it so he signalled/called play on so that A) we knew we had to defend it and B) Raiders new they were good
He can't wave play on between a penalty being given and no action being taken by the other team, and if you ask him he wasn't responding to Sharks players because we never said challenge.

Other than the ref explaining, as an important point, that we didn't challenge in time* that whole scenario was our players not knowing the rules properly.

*If the play was not challengeable but it was important that we did not challenge in time then I don't know what that means, if he felt we did challenge in time (which we did) would he have prevented a quick tap so he can tell us a challenge wasn't valid? I don't see how else it would be important.
We definitely did challenge in time and I think it actually just didn't matter and the ref shouldn't have said it, just like the other week we shouldn't have been told we couldn't challenge because they wanted to kick the ball out. Not explaining that situation properly then lead to us getting this wrong too (although ample opportunity to do our own research in between).

Now my question is, in the finals scenario, if we wanted to be able to get the loose carry call on Ronnie reviewed how do we do that? Should Fifita have high tackled Wighton to create a challengeable stop in play?
Seems like there aren't a lot of options to safely (for opponent) give yourself opportunity to challenge, which is not a great circumstance
 
Sparkles

Sparkles

Jaws
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
12,208
Reaction score
2,959
You couldn't have the ref stop quick taps off the back of mistaken challenges either, otherwise players who did know the rule would just do it intentionally, knowing they could stall okay and not use their challenge
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top