Good evening Champs!
Suffering from insomnia and not being able to find a fork to stick in my head, I decided to listen to this weeks stream of 'why this happened' from Mr. Annesley.
First up - a lot of promoting of magic round.
Next - A list of stats to show the margins aren't as big as last year. (Annesley only hates stats that prove the refs are making too many mistakes).
Game incidents:
Incident #1
Kikau (sp) did knock on the ball that every official missed. Showed the ref was about to blow his whistle, then took it away as 'unsure' and not because teams are favoured.
Question asked why did he take whistle away and bunker not used?
Anne: Said that bunker can't intervene and play went on.
Claimed that touchie, who couldn't see the play
told the ref it was play on.
Claims that ball was on opposite side of player so ref may not have seen.
Q: it happened last week as well and the ref got dropped. Is it concerning that the top referee is making these mistakes?
Anne(sley): Well it is a concern but refs gets things wrong.
(note: will use Anne from now on)
Q: Could eels then deliberately strip to then challenge and get the bunker to rule on the knock on?
Anne: They could but there's a risk (hahahahaha) that they'll end up in the sin bin for a deliberate foul.
Incident #2
Parra trainer running in front of 'riff kicker:
Excuse: Currently looking into it. No decision as yet. Explained the rule that trainers can't do what he did (fmd...we know!!!!! and I reckon the parra trainer knew as well!!!)
Q: What punishments are you looking at?
A: warning, breach notice, penalty - depends on circumstances and how much we get paid off.
Q:So you've decided it broke the rules. Just determining the punishment?
A: Nooooo. We haven't decided. Depends on what the version of what "distracting" is. (fmd).
Q:Will you ask Cleary if he was distracted?
A: Nope.
Q: Nathan didn't appear to be distracted, so that doesn't come into it then, as the rule was broken?
A: Nope (f...m...d) Depends on the definition of distracted.
Q: Could he have been allowed to take the kick again?
A: There is a provision for a re-take if another PLAYER distracts, but no provision if a trainer does that.
Q:Should there be a provision?
A: We'll review that.
Incident #3
Cowboys v Knights: Obstruction call by the bunker:
Tamaolo (sp) try disallowed due to obstruction. Ref's initial view was no try.
Issue: Did attacker take out defender or did defender commit to tackling the lead runner?
Anne: Explained the rule admitting it's divisive attributes. Droned on and on and on about it.
Anne believes it was an obstruction. Said the lead runner ran straight at the defender. Crapped on about it for awhile, acknowledging people may think otherwise.
Said the bunker needs to get involved otherwise coaches will instruct lead runners to do this a lot, lot more than they're doing it now.
-No questions on that incident.
Further questions:
High tackles: Are you happy two high tackles (cronulla) were handled differently by the match officials even though they were graded the same by the mrc. Sin bin v send off.
anne: Yes. Though he would also have been happy if both were handled the same.
Q: what about the unregistered souffs player?
Anne: Not my monkey, not my circus. so dunno.
Q: How does a player even get onto the field unregistered?
Anne: Well, there's processes in place but it's not my department so I can't really comment in any valued manner. These things happen and there are consequences.
Finally, magic round will be awesome and the ground will be fabulous.
THANK YOU EVERYONE <- That's from me, not Annesley.