Was just a feeling Rif. Actually the two decisions that were being discussed were technically as you say right as far as the rules. But too often these decisions go against the lesser powerful team.
The issue regarding hitting the trainer with the ball is one dumb rule and how its allowed again exemplifies the incompetence of the administrators. I know the argument would be that players would target the trainers, but then its up to the trainers to stay out of the play. At worst the team impeded should get the scrum. The other matter was very uncertain regarding whether the ball came off a Canberra player. But even if it did the ref called 6 to go and therefore the Canberra players were not given the opportunity if the call was changed to adjust their play for a 6th tackle call. At worst the game should have stopped and the Canberra side should have been allowed the last tackle again. Where is the common sense. The Cronk 10 minutes was perhaps harsh but that is the responsibility of the player to time his tackle and was the right decision.
What I'm getting at Rif is that these 50/50 calls seem too often to support teams like Melbourne and SC. Perhaps its knit picking, but one wonders whether the pressure not to do anything against these teams because of their influence on the game in general, causes refs to almost subconsciously lean towards these teams in decisions to avoid making a mistake against those in power who can determine your role in the game.
But as I said. Perhaps I'm pissing in the wind.