Annesley's weakly "why this happened" report

globaleagle said:
Yes, speaking of heads in sand, things being swept under the carpet;


www.theroar.com.au

It's not the crime, it's the cover-up: Why are the Titans getting off scot-free?

While the ins and outs of it all are still somewhat murky, David Fifita's drunken kinda-sorta trespass seems to be at the low end…
www.theroar.com.au


It's not the crime, it's the cover-up: Why are the Titans getting off scot-free?
Click to expand...
A 'minor salary cap breach'? That's a good one. How about corrupt and dishonest dealings at club executive level.

Buying the home security system looks suspiciously like a bribe to the occupants so they wouldn't follow through with a police complaint. A formal complaint would have led to a police charge, and that would have been a PR disaster for the Titans.

And it's dishonest because the Titans didn't disclose it. Despite all NRL clubs specifically agreeing to be bound by the NRL's integrity policy, which obliges full disclosure of anything potentially damaging to the game.

So hey! Maybe the Titans just innocently forgot to mention to the NRL Integrity Unit that they were making a small gift to some random deserving person, who by pure coincidence may have been considering having their mega-star recruit charged by police. Yeah, sure, that's plausible. Real plausible.
 
Robson was correctly not charged after being binned against the Sharks, however SKO had to front the judiciary after Cleary fell into the tackle, SKO was correctly not fined or charged.

The two incidents were not identical but very similar, there is a disconnect between the MRC and officials.

Annesley must be under scrutiny in retaining his job.
 
wedgetail eagle said:


To combat blowout scores there’s talk of a scorer’s kickoff, like sometimes we played at school.
These new rule problems are like the Greek Hydra. You cut off one head & two more grow.
Click to expand...

A rule that didn't work in Super League and induced blowouts, to fix blowout scores in the NRL circa 2021+..... Only from the "brain" of Crawley.

Imagine this if you will. Penrith score against the defensively inept Broncos. Penrith then kick off to Brisbane and keep them pinned in their 10-20. 5th tackle kick comes and To'o fields it on the 40 or 50 metre line (take your pick which 40). Penrith are then immediately on the attack in their own attacking half.

Now I know what you're immediate thought was, sucked in Brisbane (I agree). But, but ... that's not the point. The point is that it would induce even more blowouts than we're getting. With things like 6 agains, some teams would barely see the ball anywhere but in their defensive half.

And Crawley thinks this will stop blowout scores......smh.
 
wedgetail eagle said:


To combat blowout scores there’s talk of a scorer’s kickoff, like sometimes we played at school.
These new rule problems are like the Greek Hydra. You cut off one head & two more grow.
Click to expand...
Anyone who considers more rule changes to combat the poor results of rule changes needs another job.

Its double down on dip**** town

Next week 14 players on the field and 3 extra interchange

Speedy game, more pisession, more blowouts. Who would of thought . In the words of gomer pyle surprise surprise surprise
 
HoldenV8 said:
A rule that didn't work in Super League and induced blowouts, to fix blowout scores in the NRL circa 2021+..... Only from the "brain" of Crawley.

Imagine this if you will. Penrith score against the defensively inept Broncos. Penrith then kick off to Brisbane and keep them pinned in their 10-20. 5th tackle kick comes and To'o fields it on the 40 or 50 metre line (take your pick which 40). Penrith are then immediately on the attack in their own attacking half.

Now I know what you're immediate thought was, sucked in Brisbane (I agree). But, but ... that's not the point. The point is that it would induce even more blowouts than we're getting. With things like 6 agains, some teams would barely see the ball anywhere but in their defensive half.

And Crawley thinks this will stop blowout scores......smh.
Click to expand...
Putting tin foil hat on, maybe they plan to use the 6 again along with the alternate restart to keep the lesser team I it.
Imagine
Penrith score then kick off to Broncos, who the on the back of 3 or 4 6 agains march down field and score. They kick off but penrith get no such leg ups but score through sheer skill.
And so on and so on

To change a rule to prevent blow-outs as a result of changing 2 rules that caused said blow-outs rather than modify or remove the original rule that caused blow-outs in the first place, must to complicated and confusing.
Then again I am confused reading that back 😵
 
round 16 excuses...

Annesley backed the NRL Bunker's decision to overturn a try to Cronulla's Jesse Ramien for a knock-on against the Broncos. (lol, that was a classic 'make a reason up because we can't rule on forward passes).

He clarified the Bunker ruled winger Sione Katoa lost control of the ball and didn't regain it before pushing it to Ramien.

While it may have looked like an offload at normal speed, Annesley said the Bunker cannot and did not rule on a forward pass.

In the same match won by Brisbane, Annesley admitted the officials erred in missing a professional foul by Cronulla's Ronaldo Mulitalo when he knocked Kotoni Staggs out of chasing a kick.

In other comments: Lauded the fact there were no high tackle charges so players are learning. - though we all know the reality is ref's have stopped blowing the whistle, and

now Manly had a 66-0 score, the blowouts are a bit concerning.
 
Cliffymagic said:
Our 66 0 against the doggies has got nothing to do with the new rules.
Dogs just had one of the ****tiest teams ever .
Click to expand...
It did feel like we had a few 6 again calls in that first half tho. All very warranted given the dogs were flying off the line to try and unsettle the attack. I think even Flanagan referenced the hiding wasn’t due to the rules just pure difference in class.
 
globaleagle said:
round 16 excuses...

Annesley backed the NRL Bunker's decision to overturn a try to Cronulla's Jesse Ramien for a knock-on against the Broncos. (lol, that was a classic 'make a reason up because we can't rule on forward passes).

He clarified the Bunker ruled winger Sione Katoa lost control of the ball and didn't regain it before pushing it to Ramien.

While it may have looked like an offload at normal speed, Annesley said the Bunker cannot and did not rule on a forward pass.

In the same match won by Brisbane, Annesley admitted the officials erred in missing a professional foul by Cronulla's Ronaldo Mulitalo when he knocked Kotoni Staggs out of chasing a kick.

In other comments: Lauded the fact there were no high tackle charges so players are learning. - though we all know the reality is ref's have stopped blowing the whistle, and

now Manly had a 66-0 score, the blowouts are a bit concerning.
Click to expand...
Why was he concerned ?

That the ref couldn't help to narrow the gap ?

His weekly spot is just a pile of dribble, I wonder whey any journos even listen to it.
 
globaleagle said:
round 16 excuses...

Annesley backed the NRL Bunker's decision to overturn a try to Cronulla's Jesse Ramien for a knock-on against the Broncos. (lol, that was a classic 'make a reason up because we can't rule on forward passes).

He clarified the Bunker ruled winger Sione Katoa lost control of the ball and didn't regain it before pushing it to Ramien.

While it may have looked like an offload at normal speed, Annesley said the Bunker cannot and did not rule on a forward pass.
Click to expand...
His "explanation" was the biggest load of BS I've heard. He said it looked like he passed the ball "in normal speed" But "when you slow it down the ball comes away from the hand momentarily..." And he lauded the bunker for getting involved.
So, what we see is not how the game should be ruled! Every second of the match should be slowed down and analysed?
Let's have a match that goes six hours, eh?
 
The NRL keep digging themselves in a bigger hole by trying to justify the indefensible over blatant forward passes that can't be ruled on by the Bunker. To be able to rule on a 'bat-on' which can't be seen by the naked eye, yet not on forward passes is just comical.
It's akin to a judge not being able to adjudicate on a murder conviction because he isn't allowed to rule if it was committed by a knife, only a firearm.
 
globaleagle said:
round 16 excuses...

Annesley backed the NRL Bunker's decision to overturn a try to Cronulla's Jesse Ramien for a knock-on against the Broncos. (lol, that was a classic 'make a reason up because we can't rule on forward passes).

He clarified the Bunker ruled winger Sione Katoa lost control of the ball and didn't regain it before pushing it to Ramien.

While it may have looked like an offload at normal speed, Annesley said the Bunker cannot and did not rule on a forward pass.

In the same match won by Brisbane, Annesley admitted the officials erred in missing a professional foul by Cronulla's Ronaldo Mulitalo when he knocked Kotoni Staggs out of chasing a kick.

In other comments: Lauded the fact there were no high tackle charges so players are learning. - though we all know the reality is ref's have stopped blowing the whistle, and

now Manly had a 66-0 score, the blowouts are a bit concerning.
Click to expand...

The Bluedogs had alot of ball in our 10m zone but couldn't score. Barretts team is **** plain and simple.
 
wombatgc said:
Anyone that has had to deal with Centrelink will understand the ineptness of it all
Click to expand...
Sorry off subject,I have had some explosive dealings with Centrelink, which led to the last interview being delayed while the staff member found a security guard to sit in on the meeting. Still managed to reduce the staff member to a, jelly like state, without being bashed by security. A manager was called who turned out to be a bloke I went to school with. He informed me my file was marked Troublemaker, quickly sorted the problem and said, ask for me in future, Dismissed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 229 (members: 11, guests: 218)

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
11
Guests online
218
Total visitors
229
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom