Referees have ruined the game. Absolute disgrace

[Chip and Chase]

Just on the Josh Aloiai drop from the re-start, there weren't too many replys on Fox but the ones I saw didn't look like the ball had travelled forward. Wondering why we didn't challenge that one. Sometimes I think a team should challenge if only for a chance for a mental "reset" - even if you're not 100% sure and you lose the challenge, it's worth a shot. As it is, we didn't use a captain's challenge all game.

You are working on the assumption that the idiot in the bunker understands the knock on rule better than the idiot on the field. I wouldn't be gambling my Captains Challenge on those odds.

 

[Camdar]

You forgot Crokers on the first which led to their first try.

Yep I did bud there U go we totally lost that game between by that ref and errors which where costly but we looked real sharp when we held the pill bring on Parra let's get in that top 4 and we will meet them again go the mighty eagles

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

You are working on the assumption that the idiot in the bunker understands the knock on rule better than the idiot on the field. I wouldn't be gambling my Captains Challenge on those odds.

Fair point, C&C, but we didn't gamble with our challenge at all. I often wonder about the idea of saving the challenge for later when later never comes.

 

[maxta]

How was Addo-Carr able to strip the ball from Turbo right at the start of the game? He was lying flat on his back not moving, I thought as soon as he is touched the tackle is complete, but Storm was allowed to wrestle the ball from him?

Yep definately had me saying "here we go again, gunna be 1 of these BS nights'

 

[manlyfan76]

Manly made more errors than the ref.

Yes but there was 17 of us and one of him

 

[Supreme Leader]

Yes we made too many errors in that game, sure the refs surely didn't offer 50/50 on decisions. We were not the best team last night but we still managed 8 all at half time,

Thing that got me mad was the TT dropped bomb, I watched the slow mo on that and he was taken out, the Melb player had no eyes on the ball he just took TT off his line. Same with the kick to Garrick when the Melb player kept hold off his jumper and dragged him away from the ball. Both cases the Manly players had no chance in the play.

Apart form the above, we got more out of that game than Melb. Our game plan worked, we just made too many mistakes dropping the ball. We need a better 6th tackle defensive plan to protect the kick returner and the team just needs to believe in themselves. Schuster looked lost and seemed he was looking to get autographs, and that is just a plain confidence thing.

 

[mjb136]

I get we didn't have the 50/50 calls go our way, but let's be clear, 13 errors against against storm leading to 40% possession was the killer. We have been the only team in 17 weeks to have the storm worried. Next time we play, they are going down. The ref's didn't help, but it was not the reason we lost.

 

[Pittwater Legend]

How was Addo-Carr able to strip the ball from Turbo right at the start of the game? He was lying flat on his back not moving, I thought as soon as he is touched the tackle is complete, but Storm was allowed to wrestle the ball from him?

One of the many dud calls we always get against Melbourne. I still fume over a time when Matai got penalised for knocking a Storm player over in a chase for the ball. What actually happened? One of the Storm players forcefully shoved Matai from behind in the back and Matai stumbled into the player he supposedly “knocked over”.

We also managed to eke out a draw in Melbourne once before with about 40% possession.

One thing is for sure when we usually play Melbourne, we noticeably end up on the wrong side of the possession percentage.

 

[Fibro Eagle]

Schuster looked lost and seemed he was looking to get autographs, and that is just a plain confidence thing.

That was most likely one of the hardest games he has played in 1st grade as in limited opportunity and having to do the hard runs not just spaces opening up for him , He will be much better for the run

 

[Brissie Kid]

The Storm's opponents each game aren't the other team.

The Storm are playing a game of rugby league vs the referee, bunker & rule book.

If the Storm get on top of the referee, bunker & rule book, then they win on the scoreboard.

If the Storm come up against referee, bunker & rule book with a different view, they lose. Under the current NRL ways, that isn't often.

Like Manly last night, the footy team playing the Storm are just the Washington Generals.

 

[QLDSeaeagle]

Schuster looked lost

For the second week in a row

 

[Peter C]

They earned the 40 plays in our 20 by physically dominating us for most of the match. We were brave but they are a better side who deserved to win.

They MAY be a better side, but they did not deserve to win, they received a huge leg up from the referee
They got all the 50/50 calls, they had 60% possession, they had an absolute $hitload of tackles in our quarter but only managed two tries, the other two came from lucky kicks.
We were killing them out wide, just our game management was off

 

[Snake]

They MAY be a better side, but they did not deserve to win, they received a huge leg up from the referee
They got all the 50/50 calls, they had 60% possession, they had an absolute $hitload of tackles in our quarter but only managed two tries, the other two came from lucky kicks.
We were killing them out wide, just our game management was off

Again, they had 60% possession because they were playing better than us...having the ball is good management not luck. If their game management is good and ours is off, then that tells you they deserve to win.

I can believe how short sighted some people are about the game. The tries off kicks are not lucky. They got themselves into good field position and put in a great kick that came down on our try line, they had chasers that put pressure on Tom and they were first to the scraps. That ain’t luck. The Munster try was cause by Hughes break through our tired defence...if we defend Hughes better there, the kick never happens...again, good football from Melbourne, not luck.

we’re not a million miles from Melbourne and that’s nice but all this excuse making on the forum is off the mark. Two teams played last night and the better team won. Yet, here we are looking for any excuse and for what?!

 

[StuBoot]

You are working on the assumption that the idiot in the bunker understands the knock on rule better than the idiot on the field. I wouldn't be gambling my Captains Challenge on those odds.

Speaking of the bunker,it seems so often that they just don’t get it.
The Storms penalty last night when they ruled that Smith was tackled without the ball may be correct on initial look but surely the fact that he was in front of Grant meant he initiated the contact and was not going to get the ball.
Why not just play on? Last tackle, didn’t impact the play, no foul play.

This is what annoys us all, in another game it’s not even looked at.

 

[Supreme Leader]

Yes we made too many errors in that game, sure the refs surely didn't offer 50/50 on decisions. We were not the best team last night but we still managed 8 all at half time,

Thing that got me mad was the TT dropped bomb, I watched the slow mo on that and he was taken out, the Melb player had no eyes on the ball he just took TT off his line. Same with the kick to Garrick when the Melb player kept hold off his jumper and dragged him away from the ball. Both cases the Manly players had no chance in the play.

Apart form the above, we got more out of that game than Melb. Our game plan worked, we just made too many mistakes dropping the ball. We need a better 6th tackle defensive plan to protect the kick returner and the team just needs to believe in themselves. Schuster looked lost and seemed he was looking to get autographs, and that is just a plain confidence thing.

Good to see Fittler & Sterlo agree with me about the two tries on the Footy Show.

 

[The Who]

For the second week in a row

Do we need to play the Shoe for the full 80 minutes?
Why not use him as we need him, to score points?
We have The Lawman and SirLoin who are good defensively. They can each play big minutes.
Instead of having Walker as our 'super sub' why not use The Shoe in this way; he'll have a far bigger impact than Walker ever has.

 

[Waz13]

Again, they had 60% possession because they were playing better than us...having the ball is good management not luck. If their game management is good and ours is off, then that tells you they deserve to win.

I can believe how short sighted some people are about the game. The tries off kicks are not lucky. They got themselves into good field position and put in a great kick that came down on our try line, they had chasers that put pressure on Tom and they were first to the scraps. That ain’t luck. The Munster try was cause by Hughes break through our tired defence...if we defend Hughes better there, the kick never happens...again, good football from Melbourne, not luck.

we’re not a million miles from Melbourne and that’s nice but all this excuse making on the forum is off the mark. Two teams played last night and the better team won. Yet, here we are looking for any excuse and for what?!

Yep the scoreboard indicates the better team won, most always does. Our ball control and completions were not good enough and we didn’t give ourselves a chance. I certainly don’t think we were the better team, not at all. However we can beat these guys no doubt in my mind. And we did get rough calls from the ref. I rewatched the entire game and even without the beers it was plain to see we got a rough run. Des indicated same in the presser. From the first call where JAC stripped it off Tom until Smith took a dive at the end. It was plain to see mate. Those calls shift momentum and did so last night. Like others have said if Melb had that much ball and those calls against other sides they win by 50. The ref wasn’t the reason we lost but he clearly had an impact.

 

[Supreme Leader]

Do we need to play the Shoe for the full 80 minutes?
Why not use him as we need him, to score points?
We have The Lawman and SirLoin who are good defensively. They can each play big minutes.
Instead of having Walker as our 'super sub' why not use The Shoe in this way; he'll have a far bigger impact than Walker ever has.

Hey, for us really dumb people , could we really stop using acronyms for players so I can actually understand who your talking about. I am not the better for your comment even given the possible sense you are making?

 

[Eagle 1]

Storm were extremely good at slowing us down in the ruck. Thought we should have got a few more 6 agains

I believe the count was 6 - 1 to them....mmm!!! what an effort by our boys defending this lopsided count.

 

[Eagle 1]

Just on the Josh Aloiai drop from the re-start, there weren't too many replays on Fox but the ones I saw didn't look like the ball had travelled forward. Wondering why we didn't challenge that one. Sometimes I think a team should challenge if only for a chance for a mental "reset" - even if you're not 100% sure and you lose the challenge, it's worth a shot. As it is, we didn't use a captain's challenge all game.

Thought the same thing also REG, they never replayed any vision of Aloiai's knock on, thought it would of been worth a close up, mmm...why we didn't challenge is baffling to say the least !!