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

[Once Was Brissie Kid]

The thing I can't reconcile is these interpretations are for sweep plays using decoy runners etc.

This play on Sunday wasn't one of those plays. The ball had moved on across field and then been passed back in the opposite direction. That isn't a sweep decoy runners play.

It was more akin to a fullback catching the ball & then running back up field past some of his team mates and defenders.

By the NRL logic, if a fullback or winger tries to return a kick from their own 20m line or deeper, the minute they try to run forward there will probably be an obstruction call.

 

[rj90]

Ok, now that I’ve had some time to cool my jets and reflect on the obstruction… I am actually ok with the decision (and it’s ongoing consistent interpretation).

IMO, whenever a lead runner takes out a defensive player, or stops in the defensive line, AND the player with the ball runs through that particular gap, then I agree it should be an automatic obstruction. As weak as Jake’s example was, it would still fall within this ruling (although I acknowledge there is some potential argument to say he stopped short of the line). The Panther example, which was shown by Annesley, would not qualify because the player with the ball did not run through the gap that involved the defensive player impeded.

Look, we all know that the Parra player was never going to get to Turbo. However, Jake did take the space that stopped the defensive player from moving across to attempt to defend that space. I think the concept is the right one. I could live with this rule applied consistently. As much as that non-try ruling stung. The onus would be on Jake in that situation to either pull up shorter or run through. That is something he could control, and I expect he and others will make an adjustment to ensure they never stop in the defensive line.

I agree. I've come to terms with the decision and ultimately, Jake knows the rules and he should have run through.

The problem I have is that Moretti actually made contact with Jake (first) and grabbed him in that little cuddle thing. For me, that should be enough for the bunker to use its discretion that Annesley talked about in reference to the Penrith match.

Hopefully a learning opportunity for all.

 

[court83]

I'm not too worried about the try being pulled back, if that's the lame way they want to rule the game then whatever, can't change it...

What I wanna know is why wasn't brown sent for holding Brooks down after his line break??? They gave a 6 again, admitting that he has held him down too long, but it was after a line break and is a professional foul every single day of the week... Was that addressed??

Or when tom was taken out without the ball on our pet outside/inside play and there was no call?? Any comments on that??? Or is it all just about how they made the right call on the obstruction play and everything else gets swept under the rug???

 

[HK_Eagle]

I agree. I've come to terms with the decision and ultimately, Jake knows the rules and he should have run through.

The problem I have is that Moretti actually made contact with Jake (first) and grabbed him in that little cuddle thing. For me, that should be enough for the bunker to use its discretion that Annesley talked about in reference to the Penrith match.

Hopefully a learning opportunity for all.

Sure, wasn’t a good look. That said, Jake put himself in a position where he could be played like that. I’d prefer it’s black and white and runners are encouraged to stay out of defensive lines or risk that happening. Makes for a cleaner game, IMO.

As mentioned in here, DCE pulled the same stunt a number of seasons back against the donkeys.

 

[Spartan Eagle]

The on field decision was a try. The commentators thought it was a try. Unfortunately we have CSI Parramatta overruling on technicalities. We just have to accept that's the way game has progressed and learn to take advantage of it.

 

[danny-boy]

Watching the replay, it seems Jake stops just short of the defensive line, and Moretti moves towards Jake (and is responsible for contact) all the while the ball is moving in the opposite direction.

I just watched the replay and you are right.
Luke brooks still had the ball and was moving in the other direction when Moretti hugs Jake.

 

[cc eagle]

I agree. I've come to terms with the decision and ultimately, Jake knows the rules and he should have run through.

The problem I have is that Moretti actually made contact with Jake (first) and grabbed him in that little cuddle thing. For me, that should be enough for the bunker to use its discretion that Annesley talked about in reference to the Penrith match.

Hopefully a learning opportunity for all.

Unfortunately for Jake he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, he wasn't your normal block runner or decoy as the ball was going left, so I don't think he felt the need to run through the line, or look for any defenders behind him when Brooksy had the ball going left, but that changed in a split second and its history now.

 

[danny-boy]

**** the NRL and **** you Annesley. Now it’s an issue because the Roosters got dudded but last week Manly got dudded and it was the right call?

NRL admits failure in Bunker system that 'doesn't work'

Roosters dudded by twin calls

wwos.nine.com.au

 

[The Who]

It's sickening when I read/hear players/coaches/commentators saying about poor Bunker decisions: "It all works out in the long run..."
Let's see if that applies when it happens in a Grand Final!

 

[Once Was Brissie Kid]

Maybe this quote today needs to be heard in full context, but last week no 'obstructed' defender was ever catching Turbo either and on Monday it was apparently not relevant to the bunker's 'correct' call.

Now apparently it is.

The call left many experts - as well as the Roosters - stunned, and on Friday NRL's head of football Graham Annesley conceded it was incorrect.

"In the circumstances, the Bunker does have discretion to consider whether a defender could have prevented the try," he said, according to News Corp.

"In my opinion, the try would have been scored regardless and the on-field decision should not have been overturned".

NRL admits failure in Bunker system that 'doesn't work'

Roosters dudded by twin calls

wwos.nine.com.au

EDIT: found the full quote here. He does add a qualifier, although i dispute that the gap last week was created by the collision.

“I talked about the need for the lead runner to continue through the defensive line, and for the play not to be turned back through the gap created by a collision with a defender.

“Neither of these factors were present in last night’s decision.

“In the circumstances, the Bunker does have discretion to consider whether a defender could have prevented the try.

Annesley admits Roosters were robbed as obstruction rules come under blowtorch despite Panthers' statement win

Why did we ever doubt them? The Panthers entered this clash as clear outsiders, but sent out the strongest statement yet that the Premiership…

www.theroar.com.au

 

[manlyfan76]

Should be more like cricket or baseball where the players / managers call for a review. Only get X amount in a game.
An expanded captain's challenge.
Game would.move along nicely

 

[Leader of the Flock]

Should be more like cricket or baseball where the players / managers call for a review. Only get X amount in a game.
An expanded captain's challenge.
Game would.move along nicely

MF76,

Probably wouldn’t help us as we’re not an NRL favourite club; Manly dudded, too bad, so sad; Rorters dudded, so sorry chook fans, very sorry Uncle Nick, we’ll do better next time and properly instruct the bunker ref on what they can and can’t do.

Dickhe*ds!

 

[Frogz]

What do we expect. Anusley is a failed Politician, Failed director/CEO of Titans and continues to fail in the NRL. WE have black and white rules that are rainbow coloured. They are ruining the game. Just look at the stupid drop out laws.....6 agains are a lottery. Block defenders and stupid chasing a bomb and the catcher jumps higher than you and falls to the ground...Penalty. But they will tell you how good Vegas was and lets save Leichhardt. F#ck me.

 

[MissKate]

I reckon annesley helps make the rules so convoluted to keep himself in his nice cushy job. What else would he have to do on a Mon/Tue

 

[Frogz]

So in todays fox game....The commentators say Anusley has declared that there was no hip drop tackle early in the game, no charges forthcoming....... Is he the review panel now also???... He will also tell us that giving a penalty for the "late" hit on Latrell was the correct call.

 

[rj90]

A lot of waffle, but Annesley stood by Koula's try and the knock back.
Touchie called it back, ref awarded the try. Bunker could not find conclusive evidence to overturn, and therefore awarded the try.
They showed video and you can hear the touchie & bunkers decision making and calls. Usually they post later in the arvo, so will share when they do.

 

[MissKate]

What are you trying to say that annesley and the refs actually used some ‘feel of the game’ commonsense for once.

Dan innane will be gutted and will still be jumping up and down saying it was the wrong call. Funny that if it was one of the favourite teams who did exactly the same, no one would be making a big deal out of it

 

[NYEagle]

It may have gone backwards but that is called a knock-on every other day of the week. Nice to get a call after the recent debacles. We are owed and it will take many more to pay off.

I'm still shocked we got that call when the game was in the balance. We haven't gotten a ref call since Foran's "hand of god" call in what 2012?.

NYEagle

 

[The Who]

I thought it was a knock-on, and didn't even get remotely excited when Koala scooted away. I had become used to refs calling virtually every dropped ball a knock-on.
Does this new interpretation mean that ref's will be more sensible when it comes to dropped balls, considering knock-backs? I hope so.
As it transpired Manly won the match handsomely so this hotly debated decision wasn't a game-changer. It could, however, signal a change in refereeing because sometimes balls do get knocked backwards when they are dropped.

 

[rj90]

Not every dropped ball is a knock-on

Graham Annesley goes through the decision around the awarding of the Tolu Koula try

www.nrl.com