Canberra Milk wrote:The momentum thing pigman explained, that's how it is 1000%
They really really really need to change the rules so the scoring team kicks off. That would mitigate the effect of sht or dubious ruck penalties. I can't stand these massive momentum swings, every single NRL game. It's ruining the game for me.
This is kind of what I am getting at. For mine the refs buy into momentum far too much rather than ref whats in front of them and the discretionary penalties stop been given consistently. That partially drives huge swings in momentum as much as players actually infringing.
It also rewards negative tactics and conservative football and hurts the game as a spectacle. I reckon the game is far to punishing on minor and discretionary errors at the moment.
I had no issue with the refs this game or last. The Papalii knock on where it was actually stripped is the only I'm unhappy about, and those decisions are always 50:50. The last try - the touchie made a call, the video was inconclusive so the bunker did the right thing and went with the on field officials call. I can't comment on what the touchie did or didn't see, none of us can. The reason the on field officials must make a call is because they often see things that won't be caught on camera.
Dr Zaius wrote:I had no issue with the refs this game or last. The Papalii knock on where it was actually stripped is the only I'm unhappy about, and those decisions are always 50:50. The last try - the touchie made a call, the video was inconclusive so the bunker did the right thing and went with the on field officials call. I can't comment on what the touchie did or didn't see, none of us can. The reason the on field officials must make a call is because they often see things that won't be caught on camera.
Agreed
And with the Papalii call, we got one going the other way earlier when a whitehead drop was called a strip. That stuff really does even out
The Nickman wrote:People can't seriously be blaming the referees for that loss, can they??
Was it the referees who allowed David **** Shillington to take a "quick" tap and run fifteen metres to score virtually untouched??
There was the game right there, in that one instance
Spot on. The second half and to
A degree the latter part of the first half were disgraceful! Need to learn how to put a side away and stop doing stupid plays, forced offloads when we don't need to, kicking early especially when we are on their line , maybe try this thing that other teams do and actually have markers!
Bloody glad BJ is back next week, Brenko really needs to work on his first contact in defence!!!!
Canberra Milk wrote:The momentum thing pigman explained, that's how it is 1000%
They really really really need to change the rules so the scoring team kicks off. That would mitigate the effect of sht or dubious ruck penalties. I can't stand these massive momentum swings, every single NRL game. It's ruining the game for me.
This is kind of what I am getting at. For mine the refs buy into momentum far too much rather than ref whats in front of them and the discretionary penalties stop been given consistently. That partially drives huge swings in momentum as much as players actually infringing.
It also rewards negative tactics and conservative football and hurts the game as a spectacle. I reckon the game is far to punishing on minor and discretionary errors at the moment.
I agree and I can hardly stand it. But what is the response to it? You can try to retrain refs, and you should, but they're always going to be flawed. The trick is to change the rules to lessen the impact of their decisions. The winning team kicking off is an incredibly easy way to do just that.
And another thing. Why the hell does our least effective attacking player get the ball more than anyone when we are in the attacking 20. If I'm the defence and see the ball go to him for a settling run when we have Boyd, Vaughn, Papali and whitehead I would be cheering!
Also note in almost every game that penalties are squared up. If a team gets a string of penalties, you can bet your house that the other team will get a few later in the game (often in the 30-40 minute mark) to even the ledger. Look no further than our ganes against the Knights and Roosters. Even last night, the Titans were "due" 2 or 3 and sure enough got them. And scored on the back of them. Again, like you say, not refereeing what's in front of them but refereeing according to the penalty count.
So many tries are scored on the back of penalties, which are usually soft if not completely arbitrary.
They really need to do something about it.
Last edited by Canberra Milk on March 27, 2016, 3:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.
We didn't have the attack to put the Titans away even though we had ample opportunity and there was some very soft defence. Letting shillo stroll over was pathetic.
Once again we lose the ruck with and without the ball. I'm not sure what they practice but we rarely seem to put attacking players on their backs and seem to get turtled more often than not.
Line speed comes from controlling the ruck and we are terrible at it.
The only thing that got me about the refs in this game was in the first half when we got pinged for holding down in the tackle, when in the set prior they were clearly holding our players down for twice the amount of time.
Like it or not, the refs do make arbitrary calls about that sort of stuff.
Seiffert82 wrote:The only thing that got me about the refs in this game was in the first half when we got pinged for holding down in the tackle, when in the set prior they were clearly holding our players down for twice the amount of time.
Like it or not, the refs do make arbitrary calls about that sort of stuff.
Yeah, I distinctly remember Hodgson getting penalised for a nothing tackle compared to our previous attacking set.
There was another one where I still don't even know what the penalty was for...
Yes. Then the team scores off the back of the arbitrary penalty, gets the ball again down the other end... And all of a sudden they have "momentum" and are "playing better".
Like in the Roosters game when the commentators said the Roosters were outplaying us in the first half, then "let the pedal off" in the second half... when it was completely clear they'd just had the run of penalties, which later dried up and we got our scheduled square ups.
And the reverse happened in the Newcastle game. 90% of NRL games, I'll point to similar swings completely dictated by penalty counts.
You really need to see a penalty as something you get on "credit" - it's a good bonus, but you'll pay it back by conceding a square up later on. Honestly I've been watching this for the past year and you can bet your house on it.
The only exception is the favoured teams like the Broncos, who can get a penalty without having to give up a square up.
Canberra Milk wrote:You really need to see a penalty as something you get on "credit" - it's a good bonus, but you'll pay it back by conceding a square up later on. Honestly I've been watching this for the past year and you can bet your house on it.
The only exception is the favoured teams like the Broncos, who can get a penalty without having to give up a square up.
This is a good reason to give away a lot of early tackle penalties when defending your line, something a few of the top sides have done for a while. You get your line set and get some credit on the penalty ledger. Its a great way to kill percieved momentum.
The other option there is to pin them deep in their corner with a bomb or running it on the last and give the penalty away there
They kick for touch and start their set 15 out from their line.
Seiffert82 wrote:The only thing that got me about the refs in this game was in the first half when we got pinged for holding down in the tackle, when in the set prior they were clearly holding our players down for twice the amount of time.
Like it or not, the refs do make arbitrary calls about that sort of stuff.
The refs seem to perceive their role as including stage managing the game to keep it competitive as long as possible. For example, once a team gets ahead by a couple of tries they will stop getting penalties except for the most blatant things. Same thing goes with the penalty count, once you're "too far" ahead, watch the penalties stop for the things you were getting them for at the start of the game. The way the game is officiated actually rewards cheating, because you know if you play offside, slow down the ruck etc the refs will give up well before half time and then you can keep doing it without fear of consequences.
Seiffert82 wrote:The only thing that got me about the refs in this game was in the first half when we got pinged for holding down in the tackle, when in the set prior they were clearly holding our players down for twice the amount of time.
Like it or not, the refs do make arbitrary calls about that sort of stuff.
The refs seem to perceive their role as including stage managing the game to keep it competitive as long as possible. For example, once a team gets ahead by a couple of tries they will stop getting penalties except for the most blatant things. Same thing goes with the penalty count, once you're "too far" ahead, watch the penalties stop for the things you were getting them for at the start of the game. The way the game is officiated actually rewards cheating, because you know if you play offside, slow down the ruck etc the refs will give up well before half time and then you can keep doing it without fear of consequences.
I certainly think this is a factor - it is frustrating to watch it happen. The squared up count is the most obvious manifestation.
I reckon they should trial getting rid of kicks for touch and goal for all discretionary penalties. Just restart the tackle count and have a 5 minute bin for repeated offenders.
Seiffert82 wrote:The only thing that got me about the refs in this game was in the first half when we got pinged for holding down in the tackle, when in the set prior they were clearly holding our players down for twice the amount of time.
Like it or not, the refs do make arbitrary calls about that sort of stuff.
The refs seem to perceive their role as including stage managing the game to keep it competitive as long as possible. For example, once a team gets ahead by a couple of tries they will stop getting penalties except for the most blatant things. Same thing goes with the penalty count, once you're "too far" ahead, watch the penalties stop for the things you were getting them for at the start of the game. The way the game is officiated actually rewards cheating, because you know if you play offside, slow down the ruck etc the refs will give up well before half time and then you can keep doing it without fear of consequences.
I certainly think this is a factor - it is frustrating to watch it happen. The squared up count is the most obvious manifestation.
Yeah, I actually don't like it when we get awarded early penalties when the opposition is fresh. It rarely leads to points because the opposition defence is still strong, and you just know that the penalty count will be basically squared up by the end of the game, which means you will get a number of arbitrary calls made against you at critical times later in the match.
It absolutely happens to all (most?) teams in every single game. The refs either consciously or subconsciously know that they are more likely to fly under the radar if the penalty count is close to square at the end of the game.
Pigman wrote:The other option there is to pin them deep in their corner with a bomb or running it on the last and give the penalty away there
They kick for touch and start their set 15 out from their line.
It's a shame that such tactics have to be considered, but I don't see what other option there is.
Also bear in mind that against the more favoured teams, such as the Broncos at Suncorp, you might not get the square-ups at all.
Pigman wrote:The other option there is to pin them deep in their corner with a bomb or running it on the last and give the penalty away there
They kick for touch and start their set 15 out from their line.
Certainly better than kicking to the corner, letting the opposition make 50 metres in the first 4 tackles (as we do) and then give the penalty away on the 5th (as we do) because Shaun Fensom dares to touch the ball as the tackled player rolls around on the ground like a stuck pig.
greeneyed wrote:I'm sure they don't do it intentionally. What you are seeing is unconscious bias taking its effect. The referees need training on how to avoid it.
I wouldn't get my hopes up that this will ever happen. They're too scared of criticism from aggressive coaches like Hasler and co when there's an uneven penalty count.
A much more effective thing to do would be to change the rules to lessen the effect of penalties. The kick for touch is just too big an advantage for what is more often than not a minor infringement.
This stuff happens in every game, and including for us when we've got momentum
I don't see how you can argue this is unconscious bias when it's happening to every team.
Pigman wrote:This stuff happens in every game, and including for us when we've got momentum
I don't see how you can argue this is unconscious bias when it's happening to every team.
White noise.
It's quite simple. The refs are unconsciously favouring the team getting on top. They let those marginal forward passes go. They give them more penalties in the ruck. They are thinking: they're playing better, so they're not the ones making errors.
I don't think that's really the case at all though. There is nothing unconscious about it
They are favouring the team on top because that's how this game works. The team on top is rolling forward and getting quick PTB's by dominating the tackle and the referee is blowing penalties when teams are trying to slow that momentum by hanging on in the ruck
