Through green eyes 2019

[Green eyed Mick]

Move an unviable team from Sydney to Perth and get rid of the Titans and create a new side in Brisbane. Throw some money at a pacific island venture in the QLD cup as well.

[greeneyed]

The Pacific Islands aren't really big enough or have the finances necessary to sustainably support an NRL team (nor will they add much to broadcasting revenue). Best way to engage them is through NSW or Queensland Cup... and through Pacific Tests.

[gerg]

I just don't think relocation works. Would the people of Perth be as enthusiastic to jump onto supporting the Sharks over their own Pirates bid? I think there is enough talent for 18 teams on the proviso that the season is shortened. The time of the year where the talent pool doesn't look good is during the origin period. Shorten the season and use this period for Origin and some rep matches, and this is where you promote and improve the game in Pacific nations.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[greeneyed]

Through green eyes: As I saw it



"There was couple of little individual errors [in defence] more so than team structure and they're easily fixed. Nick Cotric wasn't in the line and then Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad came up out of the line, they're easy to fix. They're young kids who will fix that quite quickly. Structurally overall our defence [was good], take away a couple of those tries, the one off the bomb and where Jack Wighton threw the intercept, like that is against the run of play. There's two of three tries there I think we can fix quickly. We're at where we're at at the moment and I think there's a heap of improvement in that squad.

"It was a huge effort against a very good football team, so we didn't go away. That effort in the second half shows there's character in this joint. I'm okay where we are at the moment, we're playing against Melbourne who I see as one of your benchmark teams. So, for us to come back into that game... it shows a bit of heart against a very good footy team. What I see is a lot of different combinations and a lot of different faces in that team. We've got a load of improvement in that footy team yet."

Canberra Raiders coach Ricky Stuart.

Round 2 2019. Melbourne Storm 22 - Canberra Raiders 10. It was billed as a litmus test for the Canberra Raiders, and so it proved to be. Canberra was playing against one of the benchmark teams and the match showed how far off the benchmark the Raiders are, at present. The Storm dominated in the first half, and they led 14-0 after 30 minutes. It was where the game was won and lost. Canberra's pack was out-muscled and the Raiders struggled to make the 40 metre line in attack, set after set. Under pressure, the Raiders play makers too often didn't choose the right options - and there were too many crucial errors and penalties conceded. The Storm had all the possession and territory in the first forty. It swung around in the second half, and the Raiders came back with a brace of tries to Jarrod Croker. But the match never really looked like it was out of Melbourne's keeping.



The Storm attacked the Raiders on the left edge repeatedly, early - and that produced a hat trick of easy tries for Suliasi Vunivalu. After the match, coach Ricky Stuart was confident that there are no structural issues in defence and those issues which led to the Vunivalu tries are easily fixed. The difference between the two teams in line speed and in the ruck was more concerning, however. The other point of concern is that the Raiders looked to be short one, experienced, tough enforcer at prop. The team looked like they needed Sia Soliola - or someone of his ilk - on the field from the start, in the fierce opening exchanges.

What we do need to remember is that the Raiders were on a five day turnaround coming into this game. It was a tough battle against the Titans on a soggy field in Round 1. The Storm was on an eight day turnaround. It wasn't being used as an excuse by Coach Stuart, it wasn't even mentioned after the game. But a five day turnaround does have an impact. And I think Coach Stuart has correctly pointed out that there is a lot of improvement left in the team. The match highlighted some areas that still need work. It'll be another good test next week when the Raiders face the up and coming Newcastle Knights.

Stats that mattered? After the Storm enjoyed over 60 per cent of the ball in the first half, the Raiders ended the match with a 52 per cent possession share. That's how far the possession turned around in the second half for the Raiders. Given the Storm didn't ever lose their grip on the game - despite the Raiders having the lion's share of possession and territory in the second forty - well, it shows what a good football team they are. The teams had similar completion rates (Raiders 76 per cent, Storm 77 per cent) and an identical error count (10 each). The Storm conceded more penalties (10-6).

Both teams made a similar number of runs (Storm 171, Raiders 168), but the Storm produced clearly more metres gained (1584m-1354m) and slightly more post contact metres (464-449). The Storm produced more tackle breaks (41-31) and line breaks (5-2). Overall, the Raiders kicking game was a little off. The Storm produced more kicking metres (513-396) and more attacking bombs and grubbers. Both teams forced one line drop out. Both teams made a similar number of tackles (Storm 319, Raiders 315), but the Raiders missed more (41-31). The Storm finished with the more effective tackle rate (89-87 per cent).



Memorable moments? The Raiders' best try was their first, with John Bateman making a clever cross field run to set up Jarrod Croker for the four pointer. But the Raiders attack wasn't really at its best. Jordan Rapana was really still feeling his way in his first game back after shoulder surgery. However, he certainly produced a memorable moment in defence when he lined up Will Chambers in the 19th minute. What a hit!

Best performers?

Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad. 20 runs for 180 metres, 54 post contact metres, six tackle breaks, two offloads, three tackles. While Nicoll-Klokstad found himself in the wrong part of the field in defence at times, and probably produced one try cause, he was outstanding in attack and outshone some much bigger names in the Raiders backline.

Jarrod Croker. Two tries, seven runs for 67 metres, 21 post contact metres, four tackle breaks, two line breaks, one offload, 15 tackles.

John Bateman. 12 runs for 87 metres, 36 post contact metres, one try assist, one line break assist, four tackle breaks, 36 tackles.

Top tacklers: John Bateman 36, Josh Hodgson 32, Siliva Havili 30.
Most metres gained: Charnze Nicoll-Klokstand 180, Josh Papalii 138, Sia Soliola 100. Worryingly, only Papalii and Soliola broke the 100 metres gained mark amongst the forwards.

My player ratings:

Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad 7
Nick Cotric 6
Jarrod Croker 7
Joey Leilua 6
Jordan Rapana 5
Jack Wighton 7
Aidan Sezer 5
Josh Papalii 7
Josh Hodgson 6
Dunamis Lui 5
Joe Tapine 3*
Elliott Whitehead 6
John Bateman 7

Siliva Havili 6
Ryan Sutton 5
Sia Soliola 6
Corey Horsburgh 5

* Injury affected

Do you agree or disagree with the ratings? Let us know!



Plus follow us on Facebook: The Greenhouse Forum and Instagram: @TheGHRaiders

If you can put some sentences together and you'd like to write a regular column for The Greenhouse, let us know! We are keen to have more contributing writers!

[LastRaider]

I agree with those ratings and your comments around being a prop short. We really need Sia and Papa to start together in these big games especially with defensive teams like the Storm.

As always we are short a half and now a prop and although I do like J.Bateman’s input to the team we have many good middle forwards in the team and so I don’t understand why we bought J.Bateman when we needed a solid prop.

We lose 2 props (Boyd and Paulo) and replace with a middle forward (Bateman)???

Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse

[sprintman]

CNK might beat Bateman as buy of the season.

[Green eyed Mick]

I agree with those ratings and your comments around being a prop short. We really need Sia and Papa to start together in these big games especially with defensive teams like the Storm.

As always we are short a half and now a prop and although I do like J.Bateman’s input to the team we have many good middle forwards in the team and so I don’t understand why we bought J.Bateman when we needed a solid prop.

We lose 2 props (Boyd and Paulo) and replace with a middle forward (Bateman)???

Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse

Bateman is an excellent buy. What we needed was a lock and a prop or two props. We bought a lock and a prop, unfortunately Sutton isn't at starting prop level yet and neither are any of our other options who are either locks or too inexperienced to be starting.

I will give Sutton a few more weeks before I panic.

[BadnMean]

Starting Horsburg might be better. His hits can stop the other teams roll and he’s aggro enough to make that impact despite experience.

He’s also our biggest middle frame so get him on early next to Papa then Lui quicker legs after 20 mins.

[Green eyed Mick]

I would support moving Horsburg into the starting side at 13.

[LastRaider]

I would support moving Horsburg into the starting side at 13.

Yeah I like him. He has a bit of fire. He’s the sort guy you chat to him before the game and tell him who he needs to shut down


Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse

[The Nickman]

Good writeup Ferg, you only missed out the bit where Bateman chinked across field to set up Crokes and Jordy Raps’ big hit on Chambers!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[greeneyed]

Good writeup Ferg, you only missed out the bit where Bateman chinked across field to set up Crokes and Jordy Raps’ big hit on Chambers!

Memorable moments? The Raiders' best try was their first, with John Bateman making a clever cross field run to set up Jarrod Croker for the four pointer. But the Raiders attack wasn't really at its best. Jordan Rapana was really still feeling his way in his first game back after shoulder surgery. However, he certainly produced a memorable moment in defence when he lined up Will Chambers in the 19th minute. What a hit!

[The Nickman]

I know you are, but what am I?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RedRaider]

Good job as always GE. I don't think our first point of contact in defence is tough enough. We rarely make the effort to drive back the ball carrier. If the Storm are to be beaten then sides have to break their momentum and having the ball carrier taken backwards is one way to do it.

[RedRaider]

Good writeup Ferg, you only missed out the bit where Bateman chinked across field to set up Crokes and Jordy Raps’ big hit on Chambers!

Memorable moments? The Raiders' best try was their first, with John Bateman making a clever cross field run to set up Jarrod Croker for the four pointer. But the Raiders attack wasn't really at its best. Jordan Rapana was really still feeling his way in his first game back after shoulder surgery. However, he certainly produced a memorable moment in defence when he lined up Will Chambers in the 19th minute. What a hit!

There was a HorsPower offload in that JC try where he gave the ball back to John Bateman (may have got a call from JB) which kept the movement going. Good play by JB and the youngster and a fine left foot step to finish it by JC.

GE when you put up the Top 3 most tacklers can you also put up the Top 3 missed tacklers. Just for balance. I would have had Rapa on 6 and BJ on 5. BJ passed the ball behind Rapa a couple of times. There was also a clear missed tackle early in the first half and a lost ball in a tackle late in the first half.

[greeneyed]

Through green eyes: It's a problem when "let it flow" becomes "let it go"



At the start of season 2018, NRL CEO Todd Greenberg instructed the referees to clamp down on teams that were deliberately cheating. Teams that consistently stand off side, especially when defending their own red zone. Teams that wrestle incessantly. Teams that are prepared to give away repeated penalties.

It didn't end well.

The penalty counts sky rocketed. The pundits were not happy. And half way through the season, Greenberg issued a new set of instructions for the referees. He told them to stop "nitpicking".

"I wouldn't say we're going to soften, we're absolutely on the right path," he said in June last year.

"There has been a tendency for referees to continue to nitpick so we have to find the balance. I am desperately keen to make sure we find that balance. I don't want referees looking for penalties, I want them to continue to police those areas... I would like to see referees find the balance more often, not look for penalties and adjudicate accordingly."

Two teams that have great defence, "quick" line speed and who are "good" in the ruck were running fifth and sixth when Greenberg made that announcement. They ended up vying for the minor premiership and both made the Grand Final.

Every coach in the NRL is looking for any advantage they can find - and every team tests the rules. But some seem to manage to do it "better" than the others. Why that's the case, I'm not entirely sure.

I've previously written about the problem of "unrecognised bias" in sports officiating. It's something that has been extensively researched in psychology, and there is a large body of academic studies. In short, it shows that there is bias towards "star" teams and "star" athletes, towards those expected to win, in sports officiating. It is not deliberate, the bias is unconscious, unrecognised by the officials. But it happens.

And I suspect that because some teams are renowned for having "quick line speed" and being "good in the ruck" - they don't get penalised while other teams do when they do exactly the same thing.

The new referees boss Graham Annesley announced prior to the 2019 season that there'd be no penalty crack down this year. Rather, referees would be aiming to let the game flow.

“Our objective is to see games as open and free-flowing as possible by reducing stoppages and increasing the time the ball is in play. We want the referees to allow the players to take centre stage. Teams that don’t co-operate and push the boundaries will have to accept the consequences of their actions," Annesley said in late January.

“It’s not going to be open slather. Teams will be still expected to comply but match officials will be encouraged to react to what happens in front of them. It’s in the hands of coaches and players. The referees will be instructed to stay out of the game as much as possible. But that really is in the hands of the players and the co-operation they provide.

A lot of fans and commentators welcomed that. But I think some teams are starting to take advantage of the referee's "let it flow" policy.

We saw it in the Raiders match against the Melbourne Storm last Friday.

Refereeing was not the reason the Raiders lost the match. I thought it was great that Ricky Stuart offered no excuses for the loss in his post match press conference. He didn't even mention the refereeing. It is what the likes of Craig Bellamy and Wayne Bennett do - focus only on the things in your control. Your own performance.

But it does seem to me that the Melbourne Storm get away with more wrestling, more deliberate off side than their opponents.

The Raiders play the ball speed was recorded at 3.75 seconds on Friday, the Storm at 3.77 seconds. The Storm lost the penalties 10-6. But slowing the Raiders' play the ball is going to be part of the game plan of most of their opponents - because the Raiders' exciting attacking players take advantage of fast paced rucks.

And it seemed to me that the Storm could have been penalised a lot more than they were. In my view, they are taking advantage of the fact that referees are being instructed not to blow penalties. They're not alone in doing it.

I, of course, might have my own "unrecognised biases". After all, this column is called "Through green eyes". But it was interesting that last night on Fox League's NRL 360 program, Paul Kent started to question whether some teams are exploiting the "let it flow" policy.

It's a problem when "let it flow" turns into "let it go". But it is even more of a problem if there is a lack of consistency in the refereeing. And that's what concerns me most.

If what the Melbourne Storm do is fine by the referees, then fine. It's then up to the Raiders and other teams to match or better the Storm in line speed and in the ruck.

But for that to work, the referees need to be fully consistent in how they treat all the teams.

***

The Raiders' clash with the Melbourne Storm was a "litmus test" for how far the Green Machine has come during the off season. Has their work on defence and game management paid off? I think it is fair to say that, at present, they are still a way off the benchmark teams. They know there are still things to work on. But there's also the potential for improvement, for the team to grow and develop.

This week, the Raiders face another good test when they meet the Newcastle Knights on Friday night. The Knights finished just below the Raiders on the ladder in 2018. But they're an up and coming team, that has recruited strongly for 2019. They're in a similar position to the Raiders - in that they are bedding in new combinations, in particular, in the spine. They have shown pretty good form, defeating the Sharks and losing narrowly to the Panthers. The key dangerman for the Raiders will be young superstar, Kayln Ponga - but he's not the only player Canberra will have to watch. There's Mitchell Pearce in the halves and David Klemmer in the forwards.

It shapes as a great contest. And hopefully there'll be another big crowd this week to cheer the Raiders on - in the difficult Friday 6pm time slot. There were 14,000 at Canberra Stadium last week for the first home game, in the same slot. We need a repeat, so get out to the game! This match could go either way, but I'm tipping a Raiders win, by four.

***

The Raiders Jersey Flegg team will again feature at Canberra Stadium in the curtain raiser this week. So take the afternoon off work, and get out to the ground early to catch the Under 20s go around. Kick off is at 3:45pm, click the link for our preview. You can also catch the Raiders' junior representative teams in Canberra on Saturday, when they take on the Sharks at Gunghalin from 11am.

If you're in Sydney on Saturday, why not get out to Mounties home ground, Aubrey Keech Reserve for their clash with the Newcastle Knights. There are a heap of Raiders in the team, who are vying for first grade selection. Kick off is at 3:00pm, click the link for our preview. If you can't make it, the match will be broadcast on line at www.steelesports.com.au.

Finally, the Country Championships semi finals take place this weekend. Our Canberra Raiders Cup representatives are in action on Saturday when the Monaro Colts take on the North Coast Bulldogs at Woy Woy from 12:50pm. Check out who made the team, just click the link. And you can see a live stream of the match, thanks to Bar TV Sports.



***

The Greenhouse Live will be broadcasting from outside Canberra Stadium after Friday night's match. So don't forget to tune in on The Greeenhouse Facebook page... and if you see us, don't be afraid to come up and say hello! And if you're following on line, we love seeing your comments and questions! And please share the broadcast with your fellow Raiders fans.

***

Every week I rate the Raiders players on a scale of 0-10... and here are the total points and average points per match after the loss to the Storm. Tell us what you think of the ratings.

Total points

John Bateman 15
Josh Papalii 15
Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad 14
Jack Wighton 14
Josh Hodgson 14
Sia Soliola 14
Jarrod Croker 13
Joey Leilua 13
Aidan Sezer 12
Elliott Whitehead 12
Nick Cotric 12
Corey Horsburgh 11
Siliva Havili 11
Dunamis Lui 10
Ryan Sutton 10
Joe Tapine 9
Bailey Simonsson 6
Jordan Rapana 5

Average points per game

John Bateman 7.5
Josh Papalii 7.5
Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad 7.0
Jack Wighton 7.0
Josh Hodgson 7.0
Sia Soliola 7.0
Jarrod Croker 6.5
Joey Leilua 6.5
Aidan Sezer 6.0
Bailey Simonsson 6.0
Elliott Whitehead 6.0
Nick Cotric 6.0
Corey Horsburgh 5.5
Siliva Havili 5.5
Dunamis Lui 5.0
Jordan Rapana 5.0
Ryan Sutton 5.0
Joe Tapine 4.5



Plus follow us on Facebook: The Greenhouse Forum and Twitter: @TheGHRaiders

If you can put some sentences together and you'd like to write a regular column for The Greenhouse, let us know! We are keen to have more contributing writers!

[greeneyed]

Through green eyes: As I saw it



"When the boys came back to pre-season work this year I noticed more maturity in a lot of the individuals that needed it. There was a disgruntled feeling of not making the semis and I reckon that's been two real key ingredients for the work that's been completed in the off-season. I don't know how many games we had last year when we capitulated at the back end. Not to say we're going to win all of them but it's nice to get a situation tonight where we came out on the right side of the board."

"John [Bateman's] a very influential fellow around the group, similar to Elliott [Whitehead], regarding their toughness and their competitiveness to win. I love the four Pommies I've got because they're footy players, and there's a difference between certain footy players and others. Some have to win, some try."

"I didn't know a lot about Charnze [Nicoll-Klokstad], I'll have to give Andrew McFadden a lot of credit there. He spoke to me about the quality of the kid and that was a tough game tonight, it wasn't a flairy, attractive environment to play in tonight. He's been a wonderful addition to the squad and to the club."

Canberra Raiders coach Ricky Stuart.

Round 3 2019. Canberra Raiders 17 - Newcastle Knights 10. It was another test for a developing Canberra Raiders team, and it was a very good "pass" mark. If anything, the final scoreline flattered the Knights. Canberra's performance was clearly the better for much of the night. It was not perfect. The error count was higher than you'd like to see. There were still some problems on the left edge in defence. But it was another match played in some difficult conditions, with rain lashing the ground for part of the second half. And when the Knights came back late, the Raiders showed some good game management, icing the game with a field goal.



Perhaps the most pleasing thing was that there was better line speed in defence this week and just 10 points were conceded. The Raiders' attack still needs some improvement. Their momentum was stifled by the Newcastle Knights - the result, let's face it, of a game plan built on deliberate flouting of the rules. The wrestling in the ruck and off side play from the Knights was allowed to go... and there was not a lot of consistency from the officials in this area of the game. I wrote during the past week that some teams were already taking advantage of the referee's "let it flow" approach to officiating - and the Knights took that to another level. Nevertheless, the Raiders had three or four tries denied by the bunker - I'd argue one of those decisions, the Sam Williams "no try" call, was incorrect - so the attack was probably more dangerous than the 17 points indicated. The opportunities were being created.

Stats that mattered? The Raiders enjoyed a 56 per cent share of possession, despite having a slightly worse completion rate than the Knights (68 versus 70 per cent). The errors were fairly even (Raiders 12, Knights 13) and high, but - extraordinarily, given what was happening on the field - the Raiders conceded more penalties (Raiders 9, Knights 6). The Raiders made more runs (184-169), more running metres (1646-1371), more post contact metres (474-378), more kick return metres (179-128) and six more metres on average per set. The Raiders made a whopping 51 tackle breaks, compared to 23 to the Knights. Canberra also made more line breaks (5-3). Canberra's long kicking game was good - apart from a couple of kicks from Jack Wighton that went out on the full. If Sam Williams is still in the team next week, as I suspect he will be, he might want to take more of the kicking duties. The Raiders still produced 609 kicking metres (379 for the Knights) and one drop out (Knights 0).

The Raiders' defence was clearly better than the Knights, as well. The Knights had to make many more tackles (368-314) and missed many more (Knights 51, Raiders 23). The Knights also produced more ineffective tackles (18-10). The Raiders effective tackle rate was very good at 90.5 per cent (Knights 84.2 per cent).



Memorable moments? The Raiders' tries probably won't make the list of the best of the year. Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad scored a nice double, the first chasing a smart Josh Hodgson grubber to the in goal. The second was the result of CNK's good stepping - it was probably the best of the night for the Green Machine. Sam Williams posted the other four pointer, running straight through a big gap caused by some poor defensive choices from the Knights. The defence from Canberra was very good, but there weren't any tackles to make the finals of the best big hits of the year either. The Raiders' forced line drop out was a beauty - a long kick from Sam Williams, backed up by some great defence from Jordan Rapana. It is another sign of the work in the off season on game management.

Best performers?

This is a week when it is tough to limit the list of best performers to three. Sam Williams had a terrific match, coming into the team late for the injured Aidan Sezer, scoring a try. Josh Papalii and Sia Soliola were great up front. But here are my top three performers:

John Bateman. 16 runs for 185 metres, 45 post contact metres, two line breaks, nine tackle breaks, one offload, 41 tackles, 89.1 per cent tackle efficiency. Extraordinary performance. He looks good running in the clear, he looks good in the scraps. Shoe in for the buy of the season.

Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad. Two tries, 21 runs for 182 metres, 52 kick return metres, 47 post contact metres, one line break, nine tackle breaks, one offload, six tackles, 75 per cent tackle efficiency. I knew this player was good when the Raiders recruited him, having watched him in the Warriors lower grades. But I didn't think he'd be this good. Wow!

Josh Hodgson. Nine runs for 54 metres, 43 post contact metres, one try assist, one tackle break, one offload, 34 tackles, 94.4 per cent tackle efficiency, eight kicks for 196 kicking metres.

Top tacklers: John Bateman 41, Josh Hodgson 34, Ryan Sutton 34.
Most metres gained: John Bateman 185, Jordan Rapana 185, Charnze Nicoll-Klokstand 182. It was good to see Josh Papalii (122) and Corey Horsburgh (115) also break the 100 metre mark in the forwards.

I did want to mention a couple of other players as well. Ryan Sutton started at lock, played 50 minutes, and had clearly his best game in green so far. He is starting to show why he's been brought over from England. Hudson Young made his debut, getting 15 minutes at the end of the game. A solid cameo for the young player. He's got good potential.

My player ratings:

Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad 8
Nick Cotric 6
Jarrod Croker 7
Joey Leilua 7
Jordan Rapana 7
Jack Wighton 5
Sam Williams 7
Josh Papalii 7
Josh Hodgson 8
Dunamis Lui 5
John Bateman 9
Elliott Whitehead 6
Ryan Sutton 7

Siliva Havili 6
Hudson Young 5
Sia Soliola 7
Corey Horsburgh 7

Do you agree or disagree with the ratings? Let us know!



Plus follow us on Facebook: The Greenhouse Forum and Instagram: @TheGHRaiders

If you can put some sentences together and you'd like to write a regular column for The Greenhouse, let us know! We are keen to have more contributing writers!

[RedRaider]

I would have had Sam Williams as an 8 as well. Scored a try after a nice dummy and step, possibly dudded on another, gave the pass to CNK for his try, put in a kick which unfortunately had BJ held up and iced the game with his cool field goal at the end. Hodgo generally went left to Jack for the long kicks, but I think Sam put in a few of those which were ok and he didn't put any out on the full. Hopefully 2019 will be his year.

I had to do a double take when reading the Saturday Telegraph sports section today. There is a side on picture of the Prime Minister in a cap with his glasses on and at first glance I thought it was you GE. For those who have not had the privilege of meeting Gentleman GE have a squiz and that is close to what he looks like. Has anyone seen ScoMo and GE in the one room at the same time?

[greeneyed]

Through green eyes: It's a problem when "let it flow" becomes "let it go"



At the start of season 2018, NRL CEO Todd Greenberg instructed the referees to clamp down on teams that were deliberately cheating. Teams that consistently stand off side, especially when defending their own red zone. Teams that wrestle incessantly. Teams that are prepared to give away repeated penalties.

It didn't end well.

The penalty counts sky rocketed. The pundits were not happy. And half way through the season, Greenberg issued a new set of instructions for the referees. He told them to stop "nitpicking".

"I wouldn't say we're going to soften, we're absolutely on the right path," he said in June last year.

"There has been a tendency for referees to continue to nitpick so we have to find the balance. I am desperately keen to make sure we find that balance. I don't want referees looking for penalties, I want them to continue to police those areas... I would like to see referees find the balance more often, not look for penalties and adjudicate accordingly."

Two teams that have great defence, "quick" line speed and who are "good" in the ruck were running fifth and sixth when Greenberg made that announcement. They ended up vying for the minor premiership and both made the Grand Final.

Interesting to see that Michael Ennis is calling this out on the post match show on Super Saturday. The segment was called "Questionable Storm tactics".

It is called "The Cage", what they do in the red zone, according to Ennis. They lie on the player, pretend they're tangled up etc.

Some people on other platforms said I was completely wrong on this... but there you go. They're calling them out on it tonight in the clash in Bathurst.

[gerg]

I don't agree that the Williams no try was incorrect. It is only when you watch other games and similar tries are awarded, that is frustrating.

It's no surprise that the best sides in the comp for years are also the best at slowing down the ruck. It's absolute stupidity for the NRL to allow open slather on that area of the game. As a fan it's boring to watch and I'm sure it's equally as frustrating for the players - IMO why BJ lashed out.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gangrenous]

I don't agree that the Williams no try was incorrect. It is only when you watch other games and similar tries are awarded, that is frustrating.

Absolutely this. Would have been furious if it had been awarded against us.

[The Nickman]

The Williams No Try was incorrect in the fact that it was sent up as a Try and the evidence was 50/50 for them to overturn it. That always bugs me when the video ref does that

If it had been sent up as No Try, I have absolutely no issue with the ruling, but that should’ve stayed a Try


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gangrenous]

Disagree, clearly no try on the vision.

[The Nickman]

Well it wasn’t clearly or we wouldn’t be having this debate. And not a single commentator thought it should have been overturned either on the basis of the evidence, so how can you say it was a clear cut no try?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gangrenous]

Because you’re wrong and so are the commentators.

People out there vote One Nation Rickman, doesn’t mean it’s not clear cut that’s wrong.

Ultimately I think the only reason there is disagreement on this is because the NRL **** with the grounding rule on a regular basis, and it is applied inconsistently within a single round or even game.

If they refereed that you always had to have control in grounding the football. Which I believe currently is (and should be) the rule. Then I don’t think you would be disagreeing.

I agree with your comment in the other thread about video refs overturning grey decisions. It’s a big problem.

[BJ]

I thought there was enough doubt to overrule the on field refs for Sam Williams try. So correct call.

Unfortunately there has been other times that I have thought the same thing and it hasn’t been overruled. Including against the Raiders.

It’s the inconsistency that kills me and many other League fans.

[-TW-]

I didn't have too much of an issue when I looked at it on my phone

The screen at the ground is the equivalent of a 12" LCD which makes things look worse

[greeneyed]

I thought there was enough doubt to overrule the on field refs for Sam Williams try. So correct call.

Unfortunately there has been other times that I have thought the same thing and it hasn’t been overruled. Including against the Raiders.

It’s the inconsistency that kills me and many other League fans.

But "doubt" isn't the test. They must have "sufficient evidence" to overturn. I don't think they had sufficient evidence to overturn the on field decision of a try.

[gangrenous]

First image, touched by left hand. Second image, ball contacts ground. No way in hell left hand has maintained control. Go back and watch for yourself, there is no frame with the ball on the ground with the left hand on it. Nor will there be because when the ball hits the left hand has gone past the ball.

[gangrenous]

If you’re going to award that then we’re back to fingernail on the ball groundings, and that was a **** stupid year or two...

[-TW-]

It doesn't help fox or 9 never shows the angles that the VR ultimately uses to make the decision

They did when the bunker first came in and it was great

[The Nickman]

I thought there was enough doubt to overrule the on field refs for Sam Williams try. So correct call.

Unfortunately there has been other times that I have thought the same thing and it hasn’t been overruled. Including against the Raiders.

It’s the inconsistency that kills me and many other League fans.

But "doubt" isn't the test. They must have "sufficient evidence" to overturn. I don't think they had sufficient evidence to overturn the on field decision of a try.

Exactly! That’s my whole point, if the onfield ref had sent it up as a No Try, I’m absolutely 100% happy with it being a No Try and I would have nothing more to say about it.

But he sent it up as a Try so the video ref needs clear evidence to overturn the ruling, which he didn’t have. The fact we’re debating this at all means he didn’t have sufficient evidence to overrule.

I’m not saying it should have been a try, I’m saying there wasn’t enough evidence to overturn the onfield call of Try, so it should have stood.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gerg]

I thought there was enough doubt to overrule the on field refs for Sam Williams try. So correct call.

Unfortunately there has been other times that I have thought the same thing and it hasn’t been overruled. Including against the Raiders.

It’s the inconsistency that kills me and many other League fans.

But "doubt" isn't the test. They must have "sufficient evidence" to overturn. I don't think they had sufficient evidence to overturn the on field decision of a try.

Exactly! That’s my whole point, if the onfield ref had sent it up as a No Try, I’m absolutely 100% happy with it being a No Try and I would have nothing more to say about it.

But he sent it up as a Try so the video ref needs clear evidence to overturn the ruling, which he didn’t have. The fact we’re debating this at all means he didn’t have sufficient evidence to overrule.

I’m not saying it should have been a try, I’m saying there wasn’t enough evidence to overturn the onfield call of Try, so it should have stood.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Shirley post #99, above from Gangers is enough evidence to overturn it. It looks like he missed it, dived over it, got no actual downward pressure and most importantly didn't seem too upset that it wasn't awarded.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gangrenous]

And don’t call me Shirley!

[bonehead]

straight out no try nothing but a knock on

Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk