Annesley's weakly "Why this happened" report - 2024 edition.

[The Who]

It's been proven that having more officials complicates and delays decisions. Just like in the corporate world companies with one boss are the most decisive and nimble. So when James Graham suggested on NRL360 last night we put 7-8 former players in The Bunker to decide a decision -- majority rules -- the Englishman lost all credibility.
Get back to the on-field ref having the ultimate power but ensure that the touch judges get more involved and help the poor whistleblower out. Having three on-field officials should be enough to get most decisions correct.
How can you be efficient when you have a higher being (The Bunker) second guessing your decisions?
I feel for the refs these days; they are sort of in charge but not really.
The definition of a "sporting contest" is not knowing the outcome. No sport will ever get all calls correct because so many of them are 50:50. The NRL is deluded if it thinks The Bunker has improved our sport, or the spectacle. All it has done is added to controversies.

 

[XV-1]

[/QUOTE]

They should look at the captain challenges

Astonishing that Annesley has come out and stated that Badger will be refereeing this weekend in first grade, the performance over the last two games has been extremely poor for an official.

Nothing to do with gender when the officiating is poor.

Correct me if I am wrong.
Wests had 3 Correct captain challenges against Badger rulings and Bulldogs had one.

Has anyone ever seen 4 Correct captain challenges?

This to me says everything about the quality of Badgers refereeing.

 

[Tragic Eagle]

The bunker is an absolute blight on the game. The only people that don't see it are the NRL and the officials. Please NRL get rid of it. It is a complete waste of money.

 

[StuBoot]

I have a different perspective on this. I feel for the defending winger. He was preparing to catch the ball when DWZ came hurtling through the air over the top of him. What was he supposed to do?
He was competing for the ball but just hadn't time to jump for it.
It seems to me that everything is in favour of the attacking catcher.
Again I ask: What is a defending catcher supposed to do?

I get your point but they all know that you can't tackle in the air - it's for their safety apparently
Yes, it's a tough rule.

Problem is now that players, coaches etc will know it's not a sin bin or penalty try so...watch this space!
There's a new loophole to exploit.

No doubt, if it becomes a defensive play the usual knee jerk reactionary rules committee will see to that, not sure what they'll do but no doubt they'll make something simple complicated.

So riddle me this.

• Why is it a Penalty Try when Sam Walker put in a grubber kick v Saints but not when DWZ was tackled in the air in goal?
• They both were denied the opportunity of a fair try had they not been fouled yet one is a Penalty Try and one isn't.
• If it isn't a Penalty Try then it's generally a Sin Bin, the Knight's player got neither.

Yep, the answer is a pineapple.

 

[Ralphie]

I get your point but they all know that you can't tackle in the air - it's for their safety apparently
Yes, it's a tough rule.

Problem is now that players, coaches etc will know it's not a sin bin or penalty try so...watch this space!
There's a new loophole to exploit.

No doubt, if it becomes a defensive play the usual knee jerk reactionary rules committee will see to that, not sure what they'll do but no doubt they'll make something simple complicated.

So riddle me this.

• Why is it a Penalty Try when Sam Walker put in a grubber kick v Saints but not when DWZ was tackled in the air in goal?
• They both were denied the opportunity of a fair try had they not been fouled yet one is a Penalty Try and one isn't.
• If it isn't a Penalty Try then it's generally a Sin Bin, the Knight's player got neither.

Yep, the answer is a pineapple.

My take is that he didn't tackle him in the air, DWZ simply jumped into his arms and he was left with no choice in the matter.

 

[MissKate]

Remember the days when the touchies actually did something apart from confirming a goal kick and occasionally picking up that someone went out. Give them back their power and the bunker will be less required

 

[StuBoot]

My take is that he didn't tackle him in the air, DWZ simply jumped into his arms and he was left with no choice in the matter.

Yes, but he was penalised for tackling a player in the air which denied him a try.
If he doesn't do that, DWZ scores.
They have now set a precedent.

I just looked at it again, Marzhew didn't try to jump, looked at DWZ and wrapped his arms half heartedly around him, he never looked like contesting the ball.
I can't see why it was just a penalty whether he meant it or not.

 

[globaleagle]

Hello everyone!

It's the thread we all need, but we all hate. That's right, another season of refs boss Annesley's "weakly" report complete with a 5th year of template excuses.

1 - The refs got it right
2 - The refs got it wrong
3 - The refs got it wrong but I'm sick of everyone bagging the refs week in and week out.
4 - The refs got it wrong but "players make mistakes tooooooo."

Did anyone have round 9 for Annesley to bring out point 3 (above)?



And sorry for quoting my own post...but I'm in Panama so it's ok!

 

[eaglebuzz]

So this week he shows Paseka's sin bin for tackling when late to marker 40 metres out and indicates it's a fair sin bin.

Shows the clip of the Broncos doing the same thing in a try scoring situation 1 metre out from the line and justifies it being a 6 again and says you can make a fair case it should have been a sin binning.

You think?!?!

What a clown show.

 

[The Who]

I understand the ruling that a field goal is awarded even if it hits a defender's hand. But does it also apply to a defender's body? Just say it comes off a defender's head, is it still a goal?

 

[mickqld]

Wonder if Wayne will be hanging on every word of this week's analcyst excuse report.

 

[Eagle 1]

Wonder if Wayne will be hanging on every word of this week's analcyst excuse report.

Wayne at the presser looked mighty pissed off, thought he was going to explode.

 

[frank stokes]

Wonder if Wayne will be hanging on every word of this week's analcyst excuse report.

I thought it was a great call on Farmworth… he layed down for the penalty, got up smiling and then copped a HIA for his “effort”…

I did not think there was much in the “interference” when they denied Isaako his field goal but the “blocker” did move and then did not see anything at all in the winning field goal…

Wayne can whinge all he likes, personally I reckon they got what they deserved…

 

[The '47ers]

How the hell does JWH avoid suspension for a high shot, with an early plea, with his record?!

 

[jbb/james]

How the hell does JWH avoid suspension for a high shot, with an early plea, with his record?!

Massive integrity issue right there.

 

[jbb/james]

I thought it was a great call on Farmworth… he layed down for the penalty, got up smiling and then copped a HIA for his “effort”…

I did not think there was much in the “interference” when they denied Isaako his field goal but the “blocker” did move and then did not see anything at all in the winning field goal…

Wayne can whinge all he likes, personally I reckon they got what they deserved…

Its a fine line now with milking a penalty and concussion testing. I applaud the action to some degree And in a neutral game it seems ok. I thought herbie was milking it , but did it constitute a test.

We had some good luck with the turbo incident when someone applied moisturiser to him as he fell. Seemed very soft. Just knowing we are probably owed makes me nervous though . Imagine if we was sent for a test as he clearly milked it

NRL finding itself after more rule changes and interpretations can be a painful journey full of error , that only the best teams can rise above

 

[The '47ers]

Its a fine line now with milking a penalty and concussion testing. I applaud the action to some degree And in a neutral game it seems ok. I thought herbie was milking it , but did it constitute a test.

We had some good luck with the turbo incident when someone applied moisturiser to him as he fell. Seemed very soft. Just knowing we are probably owed makes me nervous though . Imagine if we was sent for a test as he clearly milked it

NRL finding itself after more rule changes and interpretations can be a painful journey full of error , that only the best teams can rise above

"applied moisturiser" hahaha love it

 

[The Who]

Its a fine line now with milking a penalty and concussion testing. I applaud the action to some degree And in a neutral game it seems ok. I thought herbie was milking it , but did it constitute a test.

We had some good luck with the turbo incident when someone applied moisturiser to him as he fell. Seemed very soft. Just knowing we are probably owed makes me nervous though . Imagine if we was sent for a test as he clearly milked it

NRL finding itself after more rule changes and interpretations can be a painful journey full of error , that only the best teams can rise above

Trying to make any sport "perfect" is unrealistic. Unfortunately that's what the NRL has tried to do. Introducing The Bunker was the biggest error of judgement, compounded by continual rule changes. We've all seen how trying to fix a problem in RL creates another issue, ie: obstruction, dangerous tackles, knock-ons, milking, protecting the kicker, disruptors, crushers etc.
We now have more rules in RL than ever before, and the oft-used phrase "it's a simple game" is a nonsense. I liken the approach of NRL administrators to that of a change in government: more laws equals less clarity. Both the Australian law book and the RL law book would benefit from a drastic haircut.

 

[jbb/james]

Trying to make any sport "perfect" is unrealistic. Unfortunately that's what the NRL has tried to do. Introducing The Bunker was the biggest error of judgement, compounded by continual rule changes. We've all seen how trying to fix a problem in RL creates another issue, ie: obstruction, dangerous tackles, knock-ons, milking, protecting the kicker, disruptors, crushers etc.
We now have more rules in RL than ever before, and the oft-used phrase "it's a simple game" is a nonsense. I liken the approach of NRL administrators to that of a change in government: more laws equals less clarity. Both the Australian law book and the RL law book would benefit from a drastic haircut.

I also think the powers that be are trying to distance themselves somewhat from the **** show with the bunker. when politics sets up an independant dept funded and controlled by themselves but sacrificial and seemingly independent when needing to be.

 

[Dion Johnson]

There is some angst in the refereeing ranks around the appointment of Ashley Klein to Wednesday’s Origin game ahead of Adam Gee, who was so outstanding in last year’s grand final. Apparently the decision was made by NRL chief executive Andrew Abdo, not refs boss Jared Maxwell or head of football Graham Annesley.