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

[jamesie]

And the Bully sin bin shouldn’t have even been a penalty. Would love someone to put a stop watch on that play the ball. It was lightning quick and offered no resistance in the ruck. This one was the worst of the lot in my opinion.
Absolute disgrace!

I agree, it was the worst of the lot. The decision was either corrupt, incompetent or both

 

[Ned]

Annesley's presser should be accompanied by the Benny Hill music.

 

[Dan]

And the Bully sin bin shouldn’t have even been a penalty. Would love someone to put a stop watch on that play the ball. It was lightning quick and offered no resistance in the ruck. This one was the worst of the lot in my opinion.
Absolute disgrace!

The technical penalty and why he was penalised was because they didn't peel together at the same time. A **** interpretation of the rule but that's the reasoning

 

[MissKate]

She isn't much good but is still better than half the clowns in front of her.

The plus point for her is she doesn’t seem to be as blatantly bias for/against certain teams, unlike most of the other refs

 

[eaglebuzz]

The technical penalty and why he was penalised was because they didn't peel together at the same time. A **** interpretation of the rule but that's the reasoning

Yeah I see that get penalised all the time 🧐

 

[eaglebuzz]

Of course the 6 penalties in a row culminating with a highly questionable sin binning doesn't even get a mention

 

[madmax]

The only way to save this game from the biased, diabolical and inconsistent officiating is for the head clown Anusley to be in the bunker every week for every game. That will not only spare everyone for having to listen to his political speeches every Monday but maybe bring some credibility back to the rules of the game. Every player, coach, broadcaster, fan and dare I say even the referees are confused. Get in the bunker Anusley and do your job!

Better still fu<k him off completely !!!!

 

[globaleagle]

Of course the 6 penalties in a row culminating with a highly questionable sin binning doesn't even get a mention

Annesley isn't going to mention anything unless a)The refs got it right, or b) there's massive outcry over it.
"Journos" aren't going to mention something like that because, quite simply, fighting on Manly's behalf doesn't sell papers, and 'nrl journos' are agenda driven parasites.

In an alternative universe, my guess is that Annesley would say that the ref gave DCE a warning that the next infraction would be a binning, and then he did so, ergo the ref was right, nothing to see here.

Not surprisingly he spoke about that try that was grounded on the dead ball line. We all saw it but his 'even less than not surprisingly' comment was: Sent upstairs as a try, not enough evidence to overturn.
We've seen hundreds of camera angles along the dead ball line (remember that 2021 try where at the final siren, Manly ran basically 109 metres upfield...the super slo-mo of Garricks foot along the sideline to ensure he was in?) so I question the ….truthfulness of that comment, and if he wasn't lying 'cough' then the broadcasters need to do a better job.
Or do the broadcasters help out their favoured Melbourne team by hiding the footage?

 

[globaleagle]

I guess we really didn’t expect much else than a bunch of politico-waffle from Anne. Bottom line, an official made one judgement mistake, and everything else around sin bins and high tackles is hunky dory… just an isolated error.

Oh, and loved the whole narrative creation at the beginning to set a context. Put up a graph of all head highs mapped over the year, with a clear and significant spike over the last 4 weeks… but, get this for snake behaviour… basically said he didn’t know why there were so many more head highs [done by the players-implied] forcing the refs to rule on. Of course, it couldn’t be the officials looking for anything no matter how insignificant, nor officials actually making mistakes in their judgements… 🤦‍♂️😖🤬

The narration at the start is a cop out, boring, and an attempt to paper over issues.

"Look at how much we get right, so give us a break."

It's the significance of the stuff up that's concerning.

With Crichton (as it's all people wanna talk about) GA says - it was a mistake, but we have the best people in the bunker.

What I'd like to know is how the mistake happened. I know it did happen, we all know it did, but why did this 'best person' make such an obviously wrong decision?
I liked (dunno if they still do it) the ESL where they had a camera behind two blokes looking at the replays in deciding what to do. How simple was/is that? We could see and hear their thought processes.
It sounds like I want my 'pound of flesh', and kind of, but if the best are making mistakes like this, I'd rather know why, more so than "It was a mistake, sowwwwwy, we did a boo boo, giggle giggle giggle."


-Also, if the mrc think the crichton hit was the same as the wadell hit - they can all be moved on.
If the mrc can't see a shoulder hit by haumole, they need to be moved on.

 

[globaleagle]

‘Not good enough’: Bunker official to pay price for ‘serious error’ as worrying trend emerges

‘Not good enough’: Bunker official to pay price for ‘serious error’ as worrying trend emerges

www.foxsports.com.au

Annesley said he was comfortable with the decision to sin bin several Manly players on Thursday night,because he is a self confessed moron, while he also gave the green light to Sua Fa’alogo’s try for the Storm that looked like he grounded the Steeden on the dead-ball line.

 

[Dion Johnson]

‘Not good enough’: Bunker official to pay price for ‘serious error’ as worrying trend emerges

‘Not good enough’: Bunker official to pay price for ‘serious error’ as worrying trend emerges

www.foxsports.com.au

Annesley said he was comfortable with the decision to sin bin several Manly players on Thursday night,because he is a self confessed moron, while he also gave the green light to Sua Fa’alogo’s try for the Storm that looked like he grounded the Steeden on the dead-ball line.

The reasoning of Haumole being put in the bin was he hit Mason on the neck 😂😂😂, the neck is a sin bin for contact so they say, I watched it a few times and it was shoulder to shoulder for me.

With the neck now a sin bin for contact we need DCE running the ball every set, the opposition could get a few in the bin there..

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

I like the idea of fining refs and bunkums for bad errors. If it's good enough for players, it's good enough for officials!

 

[Tragic Eagle]

Too much is at stake for this circus to continue. Gambling raises the bar even higher and this mestapiece just erodes away the credibility of the game. The Annesley pressser is a joke. There is nothing objective about it so why waste everybody's time. It just raises my blood pressure and turns me off the game even more.

 

[The Right Edge]

Lets not forget that no 2 incidents are the same and hence the rulings are consistent. The rules are written in such a way that the ref is never wrong. Most as he says are judgement calls.. the rule says that in the opinion of the referee.... etc etc. Therefore, he cannot be wrong...

Then we have the old chestnut that the bunker cannot rule on a forward pass because of the camera angles, however, on every review of a try from a kick they declare that the kick chasers are onside !! Isn't that the same camera angle or am I missing something.

Then on a recent run of penalties against blockers he commented that the chaser who was impeded may have been offside but the camera angle was not definitive.. but the linesman on the other side of the field was in the best position to rule. But you could clearly see he was offside. He even finished by inferring that he thought he was probably offside. But what were the blockers doing there anyway.. even though they were on side and well behind the ruck, the fact that in his opinion they were never getting the ball they should not have been there. Where should they have been behind the kicker around 20-30 metres away from the opposition?.

Such is life.

As an aside after the last game, between Gough and Butler they have penalised Manly 49 times and our opposition a whopping 29. 16 ruck infringement v 7, 4 inside 10s v 4, We have had 12 reported v 6 and 4 sent to the bin v zero. and that is in a total of 6 games.

As a comparison we have had Ashley Klein for 5 games, Penalties are 19-26, Ruck infringements 11-10, Inside 10s 3-4, Reports 2v7 and sin bins 0 v 0.

I would like to think that it is a competence and ability to properly manage games that Klein has over the two obviously less experienced referees.

 

[deanm]

Lets not forget that no 2 incidents are the same and hence the rulings are consistent. The rules are written in such a way that the ref is never wrong. Most as he says are judgement calls.. the rule says that in the opinion of the referee.... etc etc. Therefore, he cannot be wrong...

Then we have the old chestnut that the bunker cannot rule on a forward pass because of the camera angles, however, on every review of a try from a kick they declare that the kick chasers are onside !! Isn't that the same camera angle or am I missing something.

Then on a recent run of penalties against blockers he commented that the chaser who was impeded may have been offside but the camera angle was not definitive.. but the linesman on the other side of the field was in the best position to rule. But you could clearly see he was offside. He even finished by inferring that he thought he was probably offside. But what were the blockers doing there anyway.. even though they were on side and well behind the ruck, the fact that in his opinion they were never getting the ball they should not have been there. Where should they have been behind the kicker around 20-30 metres away from the opposition?.

Such is life.

As an aside after the last game, between Gough and Butler they have penalised Manly 49 times and our opposition a whopping 29. 16 ruck infringement v 7, 4 inside 10s v 4, We have had 12 reported v 6 and 4 sent to the bin v zero. and that is in a total of 6 games.

As a comparison we have had Ashley Klein for 5 games, Penalties are 19-26, Ruck infringements 11-10, Inside 10s 3-4, Reports 2v7 and sin bins 0 v 0.

I would like to think that it is a competence and ability to properly manage games that Klein has over the two obviously less experienced referees.

Well thank God we have Klein this week !

 

[Michael Clare]

Lets not forget that no 2 incidents are the same and hence the rulings are consistent. The rules are written in such a way that the ref is never wrong. Most as he says are judgement calls.. the rule says that in the opinion of the referee.... etc etc. Therefore, he cannot be wrong...

Then we have the old chestnut that the bunker cannot rule on a forward pass because of the camera angles, however, on every review of a try from a kick they declare that the kick chasers are onside !! Isn't that the same camera angle or am I missing something.

Then on a recent run of penalties against blockers he commented that the chaser who was impeded may have been offside but the camera angle was not definitive.. but the linesman on the other side of the field was in the best position to rule. But you could clearly see he was offside. He even finished by inferring that he thought he was probably offside. But what were the blockers doing there anyway.. even though they were on side and well behind the ruck, the fact that in his opinion they were never getting the ball they should not have been there. Where should they have been behind the kicker around 20-30 metres away from the opposition?.

Such is life.

As an aside after the last game, between Gough and Butler they have penalised Manly 49 times and our opposition a whopping 29. 16 ruck infringement v 7, 4 inside 10s v 4, We have had 12 reported v 6 and 4 sent to the bin v zero. and that is in a total of 6 games.

As a comparison we have had Ashley Klein for 5 games, Penalties are 19-26, Ruck infringements 11-10, Inside 10s 3-4, Reports 2v7 and sin bins 0 v 0.

I would like to think that it is a competence and ability to properly manage games that Klein has over the two obviously less experienced referees.

Gough and Butler are both shining examples of why Manly are considered a supposedly inconsistent team. Given a 50/50 penalty count and 50/50 "sin again" decisions, I'd back our team to beat most teams in the comp. The ongoing narrative here is that Manly are like the "bad guys" in the wrestling. The crowd likes to see them lose. Refs are never under pressure if we are flogged in the penalty count. Gough and Butler are just the most recent examples of this underlying narrative.

 

[globaleagle]

NRL head of football Graham Annesley has backed the Bunker’s controversial no-try call in the Dolphins’ narrow, season-ending loss to the Knights that left Wayne Bennett fuming.

Bennett declared the NRL needs to get rid of the Bunker claiming another blunder had been made when Trai Fuller’s try was overturned for obstruction in the lead-up.

‘Has his run checked’: NRL backs controversial Bunker no-try call that left Bennett fuming

‘Has his run checked’: NRL backs controversial Bunker no-try call that left Bennett fuming

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[sheridanstand78]

Even the most blatant mistakes are validated by this pointless official! Time for the NRL to stop wasting peoples time!

 

[StuBoot]

Even the most blatant mistakes are validated by this pointless official! Time for the NRL to stop wasting peoples time!

Interesting spin that Annesley puts on things.

It could be argued that Cogger instigated contact and in doing so checked or slowed Lemuelu in getting through the line.
You could call that ....a mitigating factor.

So, why is that mitigating factor not taken into account but as we've heard over the past few rounds it is when there is head contact ( as in Ramien on Lawton on Sunday)?

 

[ALinda]

The only seemingly reasonable ref, Adam Gee, has been dropped this week. Apparently Annusly came out and said it wasn't because of a particular howler and it was based purely on form?! Even though we lost badly on Sunday, it wasn't due to the ref...it makes no sense. I guess because he's decent and we can't have that!