Annesley's weakly "Why this happened" report - 2022

Rd 24:

nrl.com

NRL head of football Graham Annesley has warned that players who repeatedly attract minor charges from the match review committee may be hit with a higher grading and increased penalty as a personal deterrent.

Annesley revealed at his weekly media briefing that the match review committee has the power to impose a grade two charge for an offence usually regarded as a grade one offence for repeat offenders.

- ah hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha but they rarely rarely do you script reading gobgob.

He went on to say they did it to McGuire back in 2019 (3 seasons ago) then went on to say that shows how tough the mrc are.

Then repeated once again the mrc is totally independent so don't yell at him.

Speaking of things that need a shake up. mrc

www.nrl.com

Repeat offenders risk 'personal deterrent'

NRL head of football Graham Annesley has warned that players who repeatedly attract minor charges could be hit with a higher grading and increased penalty as a 'personal deterrent'.
www.nrl.com www.nrl.com

He then went on to say he doesn't think players ever go out there to deliberately break the rules.

s...m...h
 
globaleagle said:
Rd 24:

nrl.com

NRL head of football Graham Annesley has warned that players who repeatedly attract minor charges from the match review committee may be hit with a higher grading and increased penalty as a personal deterrent.

Annesley revealed at his weekly media briefing that the match review committee has the power to impose a grade two charge for an offence usually regarded as a grade one offence for repeat offenders.

- ah hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha but they rarely rarely do you script reading gobgob.

He went on to say they did it to McGuire back in 2019 (3 seasons ago) then went on to say that shows how tough the mrc are.

Then repeated once again the mrc is totally independent so don't yell at him.

Speaking of things that need a shake up. mrc

www.nrl.com

Repeat offenders risk 'personal deterrent'

NRL head of football Graham Annesley has warned that players who repeatedly attract minor charges could be hit with a higher grading and increased penalty as a 'personal deterrent'.
www.nrl.com www.nrl.com
Click to expand...
will it be called the NAS/JWH grub of the week award grading?
 
Eagle of London said:
will it be called the NAS/JWH grub of the week award grading?
Click to expand...


It could be 'end-of-season-itis' but it's just so much dribble I can't be bothered this week. I just scan forward to see if anything interesting is said.

I actually prefer the questions as it takes him from his script but alas, into prepared excuses.

  • the mrc is independent
  • I don't think players try to break the rules
  • i'm happy with the mrc's decisions...and I have to be as they are independent
  • -It's not up to me to offer opinions...as they are no more important than anyone elses.
  • - The refs are assessing HIA's the same and if the doc's see something...they will stop the game.
  • -I'm a little teapot
 
globaleagle said:
It could be 'end-of-season-itis' but it's just so much dribble I can't be bothered this week. I just scan forward to see if anything interesting is said.

I actually prefer the questions as it takes him from his script but alas, into prepared excuses.

  • the mrc is independent
  • I don't think players try to break the rules
  • i'm happy with the mrc's decisions...and I have to be as they are independent
  • -It's not up to me to offer opinions...as they are no more important than anyone elses.
  • - The refs are assessing HIA's the same and if the doc's see something...they will stop the game.
  • -I'm a little teapot
Click to expand...
And the only thing that makes sense from Annesley is dot point 6.
 
After dodging the moses forward pass for a few days in a desperate attempt to prove it wasn't forward....

toothless mouthpiece annesley has come out and said it was 'marginally' forwards but suck a fat one nrl fans because there is no movement afoot to allow the bunker to rule on forward passes next year.


“After reviewing the Moses pass it does appear to be forward out of his hands, which is the only thing that matters under the laws of the game,” he told reporters on Monday.

“It is marginal, but forward nonetheless.

- If you need proof he's lost the plot...read this -

"I'm standing here saying it's a forward pass. But it's not the howler it's been made out to be."

The forward pass was missed by both the referee and touch judge, with the Bunker unable to rule on forward passes.

"Most of the discussion has been about the ball and where it travels and where it's caught, which is basically irrelevant, to be honest," Annesley added.

"The rule, as the rule always has been, is about how the ball leaves the hands.

"Some of the claims about how far this ball has travelled forward I think are exaggerated. There have been all sorts of claims about this being metres forward.

"I think some of the claims have been grossly exaggerated."

----------------------------------------------

Which got me thinking...

If the only thing that matters is the ball leaving your hands forwards.... why can't everyone do a moses, turn you back to the line, then pass backwards out of your hands. The ball will travel forward in respect to the direction your team is running, but it will leave the hands backwards...so this new super chip wont pick it up (and annesley said it's the only thing that counts)...?
 
Last edited:
The Bunker can't rule if the ball is passed forward, but surely it can rule on whether the ball leaves the hands forward or backwards. Even blind Freddy can see that.
For the past five years I've been asking the following question: Has the Bunker improved the sport?
Even if you think it has the subsequent question would be: Could the many millions of dollars spent on the Bunker have better utilised, such as in regional areas or in junior development?
 
It was a shocker and to try and justify it with gobbledygook about the physics of how the ball leaves the hands is ridiculous. It was forward, really forward. Just own it, sack the touchie who was standing right in line with it and still couldn't see it, and then say sorry. They need to allow some sort of challenge for forward passes as obvious as this. Even the idiots in the bunker could have determined that this was forward so why not let them rule on it ??. If the evidence is not clear enough then they go with on field decision, challenge is retained and we are no worse off. Pretty much the same process for every other decision that is challenged or try that is reviewed. The bunker is supposed to stop howlers. This was a howler.
 
Last edited:
Mark from Brisbane said:
Well they couldn’t give to Grant “ my old man used to play for the Eels “ Atkins could they ???
Click to expand...
He's in the bunker. Unbelievable.

But...can he be any worse than Sutton who did the bunker for the Penrith-Souths game and incorrectly ruled 2 Penrith tries as "no try". That included one where the ball was on the ground and the Penrith player put his hand on it. What was he looking at FFS?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 331 (members: 13, guests: 318)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Online statistics

Members online
13
Guests online
318
Total visitors
331
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom