[Round 22, 2021] Broncos vs Roosters

[Broncorob]

on a side note bhq.. i have now progressed from a BRL player to a NYC player....lmao surely the BRL is a higher standard. love your work though

 

[BroncsFan]

The play starts when the ball clears the ruck, Klein is making the argument that the mistake happened before that process was complete. Despite him calling Play 3 that doesn't initiate the play.

No ... I can't see how "the play starts when the ball clears the ruck" is correct.

There are occurences where the ball is dropped in the act of playing the ball, but the ref calls an error instantly... there are occasions on those types of plays where a player will pick the ball up and run off to score only for the ref to call them back and claim "the play has ended because he has lost it in the ruck"... and then idiot commentators to say "why isn't that play on??"

Any other situation a knock on is play on if the opposing team picks it up cleanly... unless you are suggesting the tackle, the play the ball/ruck and clearance of the ruck are all different situations in the game... and if that is the case then the ref called an end to the tackle and the error occurred in the ruck anyway... so the roosters should only be able to challenge what happened in the situation where the ref has called time off i.e. the ruck

These are fundamental principles of the game... they absolutely must be known by the ref... and they cannot suddenly change them after they have already made a ruling, which is what Klein did... so are we to believe that Teddy is now the new Cam Smith as an onfield ref or is Klein incompetent, corrupt or weak as piss to be manipulated by a player he is meant to be adjudicating over?

Any of those options means that Klein is not qualified to be a referee

 

[tommy]

Bright side is, we’re going to get to see @Huge defend Kennedy for the next week

Main argument will be that gamble also kicks out on the full from kickoffs, which absolves Isaako from any wrongdoing, which by extension means Kennedy had a good game.

 

[broncsgoat]

Main argument will be that gamble also kicks out on the full from kickoffs, which absolves Isaako from any wrongdoing, which by extension means Kennedy had a good game.

Don’t forget Croft

 

[Big Pete]

No ... I can't see how "the play starts when the ball clears the ruck" is correct.

There are occurences where the ball is dropped in the act of playing the ball, but the ref calls an error instantly... there are occasions on those types of plays where a player will pick the ball up and run off to score only for the ref to call them back and claim "the play has ended because he has lost it in the ruck"... and then idiot commentators to say "why isn't that play on??"

Any other situation a knock on is play on if the opposing team picks it up cleanly... unless you are suggesting the tackle, the play the ball/ruck and clearance of the ruck are all different situations in the game... and if that is the case then the ref called an end to the tackle and the error occurred in the ruck anyway... so the roosters should only be able to challenge what happened in the situation where the ref has called time off i.e. the ruck

These are fundamental principles of the game... they absolutely must be known by the ref... and they cannot suddenly change them after they have already made a ruling, which is what Klein did... so are we to believe that Teddy is now the new Cam Smith as an onfield ref or is Klein incompetent, corrupt or weak as piss to be manipulated by a player he is meant to be adjudicating over?

Any of those options means that Klein is not qualified to be a referee

It would be different in general play because you're playing to the whistle. However when you give the players the option to challenge a decision you give them an opportunity to challenge the entire tackle. I agree it's silly but they're entitled to within the rules as long as they refer to that specific part.

 

[meady]

I enjoyed the game and to lose like that at the end is ridiculous.

Kev and his staff are building nicely imo, massive improvements as a team

 

[NSW stables]

You cant blame oates for Copley's try. Our left side was outnumbered (again) so he had to charge up and try and end the backline movement. Oates has stopped several tries this year doing the very same thing. Unfortunately tedesco saw him coming and put the kick in this time.

My concern regarding the positioning/urgency though was nui. He was unlikely to stop the try, but he was not even within the screen shot.

Again the effort was there and had we not been fucked over because it was not in the script that we win, we would have won that game.

 

[BroncsFan]

It would be different in general play because you're playing to the whistle. However when you give the players the option to challenge a decision you give them an opportunity to challenge the entire tackle. I agree it's silly but they're entitled to within the rules as long as they refer to that specific part.

So have the referees been interpreting it wrong for at least the last 20-25yrs that I've been watching?

If a knock on in the play the ball should effectively be play on for the defending team why are they calling an error instantly before either team has an opportunity to play at the ball?

Have there also not been situations where tries have been denied because the vid ref has seen a knock on in the play the ball... is that not ruling on the previous tackle under that interpretation?

 

[MrMoore]

Why do you guys even care anymore, I gave up a long time ago. Every week there is some BS call, some plain as day bullfuckery that just gets swept under the rug during the week, and it is not just broncos games.

Commentators, refs, video refs and ex palyers kick up a stink about a 100% BS call and this time next week you won't hear a peep.

Edit. Accidently pressed post but **** it, won't make a difference. Unfortunately I will keep supporting the NRL by buying Broncos shit every year and watching the games but I don't like Rugby League anymore, Broncos is my blood, starting to feel like a chore.

 

[Sproj]

I miss rugby league, after this result tonight on the back of that decision and the results of the fan poll, I think I’m starting to accept it’s never coming back.

 

[Broncorob]

Main argument will be that gamble also kicks out on the full from kickoffs, which absolves Isaako from any wrongdoing, which by extension means Kennedy had a good game.

didnt go out on full and sail into the grandstand....lol..but take your point

 

[Broncorob]

I miss rugby league, after this result tonight on the back of that decision and the results of the fan poll, I think I’m starting to accept it’s never coming back.

nah...Sproj losing by a point in a controversial decision is the fabric of rugby league. give me this over the saints or manly debacles any day of the week. this is what its about imo. hard fought loss with a touch of controversy

 

[Big Pete]

So have the referees been interpreting it wrong for at least the last 20-25yrs that I've been watching?

If a knock on in the play the ball should effectively be play on for the defending team why are they calling an error instantly before either team has an opportunity to play at the ball?

Have there also not been situations where tries have been denied because the vid ref has seen a knock on in the play the ball... is that not ruling on the previous tackle under that interpretation?

That's a different circumstance.

I've been trying to look for an official explanation to no avail but my understanding is that the play 'ends' when a tackle is made. The play begins after the ball clears the ruck, so if a mistake is made during that in-between period it's instantly ruled.

Conversley a player can actually step over the touch line in the process of getting up and playing the ball but as long as they have both feet in the field of play they will be cleared of going into touch.

What Klein is saying is that the mistake happened during that window, so Play 3 (technically 4, but it's confusing enough already) technically never happened they could review everything in the lead up.

I'm not saying it's right or that's the way it should be. I just think it's their rationale although I think either way Annesley is going to issue an apology and that will make everything A-OK.

 

[Allo]

That's a different circumstance.

I've been trying to look for an official explanation to no avail but my understanding is that the play 'ends' when a tackle is made. The play begins after the ball clears the ruck, so if a mistake is made during that in-between period it's instantly ruled.

Conversley a player can actually step over the touch line in the process of getting up and playing the ball but as long as they have both feet in the field of play they will be cleared of going into touch.

What Klein is saying is that the mistake happened during that window, so Play 3 (technically 4, but it's confusing enough already) technically never happened they could review everything in the lead up.

I'm not saying it's right or that's the way it should be. I just think it's their rationale although I think either way Annesley is going to issue an apology and that will make everything A-OK.

Or he won't because who cares about which and how rules are applied anymore depending on what they feel like talking about that week.

The one thing they'll probably say is Mead should've gone to the bin and issue Uncle Nick the Roosters an apology for not doing so

 

[broncos4life]

Again it was a poor choice of words. The play did end with the knock on, Klein just considered it the conclusion of Play 2, instead of the start of Play 3.

The play starts when the ball clears the ruck, Klein is making the argument that the mistake happened before that process was complete. Despite him calling Play 3 that doesn't initiate the play.

So by that reasoning you can always challenge 2 plays if you **** up in the ruck?

How great another precedent set that the ‘good teams’ will exploit. Watch for Melbourne and the Roosters to make a habit of stuffing up the play the ball if they want to challenge the play before.

 

[broncos4life]

Why pay 10k for something that won't change the result. It's on the players for the loss no matter how bad the refereeing. Too many dumb errors. Our attack was terrible. One out rucks and a bomb all night.

No one is disputing that and everyone is acutely aware of where this team
Is. That doesn’t change the fact that all teams no matter of their standing deserve to be adjudicated evenly and without bias, this used to be the basis of all sports and the main thing that drew people to it. Unfortunately that has been eroded over time and replaced by narratives and decisions that favour the leading teams so the refs don’t risk an outcry if it is wrong because who gives a shit if the bottom teams get dudded, they bought it on themselves right?

 

[Broncorob]

No one is disputing that and everyone is acutely aware of where this team
Is. That doesn’t change the fact that all teams no matter of their standing deserve to be adjudicated evenly and without bias, this used to be the basis of all sports and the main thing that drew people to it. Unfortunately that has been eroded over time and replaced by narratives and decisions that favour the leading teams so the refs don’t risk an outcry if it is wrong because who gives a shit if the bottom teams get dudded, they bought it on themselves right?

as per my previous...you can ask the question without incurring 10k... we should be asking questions and if its nit Kev shoukd be Ikin in media put some doubt in the ref or bumkers head accountability is vital but if no questions same old same old

 

[theshed]

That's a different circumstance.

I've been trying to look for an official explanation to no avail but my understanding is that the play 'ends' when a tackle is made. The play begins after the ball clears the ruck, so if a mistake is made during that in-between period it's instantly ruled.

Conversley a player can actually step over the touch line in the process of getting up and playing the ball but as long as they have both feet in the field of play they will be cleared of going into touch.

What Klein is saying is that the mistake happened during that window, so Play 3 (technically 4, but it's confusing enough already) technically never happened they could review everything in the lead up.

I'm not saying it's right or that's the way it should be. I just think it's their rationale although I think either way Annesley is going to issue an apology and that will make everything A-OK.

On a side note, Gamble unearthed an interesting loop hole if I understand it correctly. Ref calls six again inside roosters 10m line, Gamble rolls a grubber into the in goal, Cobbo plants it over the dead ball line, penalty to the broncos. I guess because no advantage?

Does this mean if a team gets a 6 again inside the opps 10m that you get a free shot at an attacking grubber and if you botch it, you get a penalty - we took the tap in that instance but it would also be a good way to bring back taking the 2.