Ashley Klein is a corrupt dud

Nah don't pull that shit mate. You watch the same thing we do, week in week out, he's full of shit.

Arguments against it point to stats which we know they equalise, or like you, cherry pick like 3 things out of the 100s of bullshit calls we have seen from him over the years.

Incompetence gets fixed. Corruption is planned.
Pull what 'shit'? Hold you to account and have you provide examples of his corruption from yesterday? I'd be happy to go over the game and review each call if you want but I understand at this time you may have more pressing matters.

Even in the examples I gave, it could have been worse. Warriors fans would argue that it should have been worse and P. Riki should have gone for 10. I've certainly seen those ruled that way before.
 
Pull what 'shit'? Hold you to account and have you provide examples of his corruption from yesterday? I'd be happy to go over the game and review each call if you want but I understand at this time you may have more pressing matters.

Even in the examples I gave, it could have been worse. Warriors fans would argue that it should have been worse and P. Riki should have gone for 10. I've certainly seen those ruled that way before.

Would you say Brisbane was holding down any longer than NZ were? The fact they had a faster PTB speed would imply it was actually the other way. So why were we being pinged repeatedly for being too slow while they were saints?

There is no doubt Brisbane were poor yesterday, I don't think anyone isn't saying that. But do you feel both teams were being held to the same standard?

I'd like your thoughts on the other Khan-Pereira penalty early where it appeared we called penalised for being too slow despite the fact he had barely if at all even been touched by that stage. If he had been touched, he didn't even think it was a tackle because he went to keep running.

Someone put up a video showing us getting pinged and NZ getting nothing in a side by side comparison even though both tackles looked very similar, ours of course being faster.

It isn't always just the penalties / infringements called either, its the ones that aren't that can be just as influential.

And you say the non-binning meant nothing at 34-12 or whatever it was and you might be right but that shouldn't matter should it? Whether something is bin worthy in the first minute or thirty-first minute shouldn't matter.

This was also compounded by Walsh having to go off for a HIA for a non-high shot - so which is it? Also why wasn't Egan an almost automatic HIA? He looked out to me. I wasn't watching at these points though, I only saw the lowlights, I had switched off by then. So I might be wrong.
 
Would you say Brisbane was holding down any longer than NZ were? The fact they had a faster PTB speed would imply it was actually the other way. So why were we being pinged repeatedly for being too slow while they were saints?

There is no doubt Brisbane were poor yesterday, I don't think anyone isn't saying that. But do you feel both teams were being held to the same standard?

I'd like your thoughts on the other Khan-Pereira penalty early where it appeared we called penalised for being too slow despite the fact he had barely if at all even been touched by that stage. If he had been touched, he didn't even think it was a tackle because he went to keep running.

Someone put up a video showing us getting pinged and NZ getting nothing in a side by side comparison even though both tackles looked very similar, ours of course being faster.

It isn't always just the penalties / infringements called either, its the ones that aren't that can be just as influential.

And you say the non-binning meant nothing at 34-12 or whatever it was and you might be right but that shouldn't matter should it? Whether something is bin worthy in the first minute or thirty-first minute shouldn't matter.

This was also compounded by Walsh having to go off for a HIA for a non-high shot - so which is it? Also why wasn't Egan an almost automatic HIA? He looked out to me. I wasn't watching at these points though, I only saw the lowlights, I had switched off by then. So I might be wrong.
The play the ball speed can be decieving. They let you get away with more when you dominate tackles. If you hit your front and fight in tackles they are more 6 again trigger happy.

The AKP one was bad. Barnett also got away with a blatant one late in the half when the Broncos were attacking. Carrigan also could have been pinged about 2 more times. Not sure what has got into him. He honestly looked concussed he was doing so much blatant shit.

The Tuapiki non sin bin was horrendous and it is a worrying trend coming into the game where they are just blowing 6 agains for these. Needs to be fixed.
 
What was Klein supposed to do? Ignore the obvious second effort from Arthars to drive Khan-Pereira closer to touch? Ignore Walsh being obviously off-side? He even allowed Preston to stay on the field despite his questionable tackle.

Yeah Tuaupiki could have been binned. However it was 34-12, come on now.
Maybe call the same things that the Warriors did? Offside all night, forward passes, holding down longer than us. I keep saying it. It’s not about the penalties called, it’s that the same penalties don’t get called evenly. It’s game manipulation.
 
Would you say Brisbane was holding down any longer than NZ were?
See this is where I think a few of you have may have it wrong.

It's not about how long you hold a player down for. It's about winning the tackle. This is done through line-speed, contact and technique and the Broncos simply pale in comparison to most teams and leave themselves susceptible.

I'd like your thoughts on the other Khan-Pereira penalty early where it appeared we called penalised for being too slow despite the fact he had barely if at all even been touched by that stage. If he had been touched, he didn't even think it was a tackle because he went to keep running.
What time was that roughly? I'll check it out once NRL.com have uploaded their replay. The 9Now replay is all over the place.

And you say the non-binning meant nothing at 34-12 or whatever it was and you might be right but that shouldn't matter should it? Whether something is bin worthy in the first minute or thirty-first minute shouldn't matter.
Just in context of corruption and deciding the result. At that point, the game was virtually over so it had little bearing.
This was also compounded by Walsh having to go off for a HIA for a non-high shot - so which is it? Also why wasn't Egan an almost automatic HIA?
That's a question for the independent doctor. Not every collision that results in an HIA deserves a penalty. I do think Barnett was lucky to escape scrutiny.
Someone put up a video showing us getting pinged and NZ getting nothing in a side by side comparison even though both tackles looked very similar, ours of course being faster.
That was with Barnett, yeah? I saw something similar floating around. I'd have to see the proper context. Whether right or wrong, the officials will manage games where they'll give teams the benefit of the doubt and assume there's an element of milking with players getting tangled. The old fool me once, fool me twice etc. It could have been a set restart but I'm sure you could find a few set restarts the Broncos were lucky to get away with themselves.
 
What was Klein supposed to do? Ignore the obvious second effort from Arthars to drive Khan-Pereira closer to touch?

NO ! He didn`t have a finger on him !
According to some very one eyed supporters here . Or so I read yesterday in the post game thread .
 
Maybe call the same things that the Warriors did? Offside all night, forward passes, holding down longer than us. I keep saying it. It’s not about the penalties called, it’s that the same penalties don’t get called evenly. It’s game manipulation.
The problem was the Broncos barely held onto the ball to force officials hand. What was the possession count? 80/20? You can't draw penalties in defence unless you milk an obstruction. It's probably Reynolds best asset.

Would love an alternative angle to see whether teams are onside/off-side. I have noticed on occasion players will have their front foot infront of the official which is a no-no unless you're on your goal line. However there's also been occassions where I've noticed team like Penrith actually go back an additional metre just to make sure they won't give away a penalty.

So there could be something to it, but saying 'all night' (during a day game) doesn't really add to the point. It just sounds like a cliche that fans have been using for 100+ years.
 
However there's also been occassions where I've noticed team like Penrith actually go back an additional metre just to make sure they won't give away a penalty.
Which some teams are simply not able to allow for without giving away set restarts. Penrith, clearly through beautiful coaching, are afforded this luxury to slow the ruck more to allow the line to retreat '11m'.

We are letting the opposition play the ball before we are even back 7 or 8m some rucks due to the fear of giving away more set restarts/penalties currently. This means no line speed, offside set restarts, a quicker next ruck as you aren't winning the wrestle, and generally huge metres for the opponent each set.
 
The problem was the Broncos barely held onto the ball to force officials hand. What was the possession count? 80/20? You can't draw penalties in defence unless you milk an obstruction. It's probably Reynolds best asset.

Would love an alternative angle to see whether teams are onside/off-side. I have noticed on occasion players will have their front foot infront of the official which is a no-no unless you're on your goal line. However there's also been occassions where I've noticed team like Penrith actually go back an additional metre just to make sure they won't give away a penalty.

So there could be something to it, but saying 'all night' (during a day game) doesn't really add to the point. It just sounds like a cliche that fans have been using for 100+ years.
I was sitting on the 30m line and watched them move forward before the ball had been placed on the ground. I watched them not make it back to the ref and make tackles. Yet I watched us do the same thing and get called for it.

I watched Manly be in the first receivers face as he caught it all night. I watched them play the week before and the week after and their line speed wasn’t even close to being as quick.

I watched the Roosters get away with a flying headbutt. I watched the Roosters do four illegal tackles in a row without a sin bin.

It’s not just Klein. It’s the NRL and there’s absolutely no disputing it. The same things we get pinged for are happening against us with no repercussions.
 
It's not about how long you hold a player down for. It's about winning the tackle. This is done through line-speed, contact and technique and the Broncos simply pale in comparison to most teams and leave themselves susceptible.


I have talked about this recently .
Effective tackling .
 
I have talked about this recently .
Effective tackling .
I watch every game, every week. Effective tackles are an opinion of the referee on the field at the time. Every game is reffed differently because of this. What we think is a dominant tackle, which Pat gets a lot of by the way, isn’t considered dominant so we are penalised for laying on them too long.

Once again, every penalty that is given has a grey area that comes down to referees (and the referee boss in their ears) discretion.
 
See this is where I think a few of you have may have it wrong.

It's not about how long you hold a player down for. It's about winning the tackle. This is done through line-speed, contact and technique and the Broncos simply pale in comparison to most teams and leave themselves susceptible.
100%. This is what all the game manipulation and rigged bullshit on here really boils down to. Watch the opening sets of a match, we are immediately left on the ground at the play the ball and out of position before a 6 again has even been called. Some people on here have really lost their minds lmao
 
Which some teams are simply not able to allow for without giving away set restarts. Penrith, clearly through beautiful coaching, are afforded this luxury.
If other teams tried this they'd likely get dominated in the ruck because they're not as adept in defence as Penrith. However they wouldn't get pinged for being off-side which is the trade off.

I was sitting on the 30m line and watched them move forward before the ball had been placed on the ground. I watched them not make it back to the ref and make tackles. Yet I watched us do the same thing and get called for it.
Okay, when?

Was it the 51st and 55th minute when the Warriors were pinged?

Were they as they blatantly off-side as Reece Walsh was inside the 10m.

I'm sure there's a Warriors fan who was sitting 30m out too who'd say there were multiple instances the Broncos were off-side. Without evidence it means jack. As it stands, it was 2-all for off-side, which seems to suggest the Warriors were penalised as much as the Broncos.
We are letting the opposition play the ball before we are even back 7 or 8m some rucks due to the fear of giving away more set restarts/penalties currently. This means no line speed, offside set restarts, a quicker next ruck as you aren't winning the wrestle, and generally huge metres for the opponent each set.
Yes, the Broncos desperately need to fix their defence.
 
Back
Top