The Bunker: what a joke

[The Who]

I've only seen the highlights but in the Easts V Dogs match a try was scored one tackle after an obvious knock-on. The Bunker saw it apparently but couldn't rule a no try because they can only judge on the final play, not anything that happened pre the last play-the-ball.
So, we spend millions on technology to get all the calls correct. The Bunker sees an infringement leading up to a "try" but isn't permitted to rule on it so we have a "try" awarded that everyone knows was not a try.
Seriously? The Bunker permits an obvious incorrect decision to stand.
Imagine this happening in real life.
And how come The Bunker can trawl through the back plays and send a player like Guacca to the sin-bin three minutes after the alleged incident occurred?
The NRL expects us to believe that this is a professional sport.
Isn't it bad enough that the sport is being manipulated by refs on the take from gambling companies?

 

[bob dylan]

It was a complete disaster.

The ref was out of his depth and bunker should of been blown up by the Russians.

 

[The Who]

Ricky has it 100% correct: "I believe the bunker is damaging our game, I don't believe we do need the bunker because they can't get it right," he said.

"I really believe the bunker is getting it so wrong we need to have the bunker only involved in contentious tries.

"It's just damaging the fabric and the way we want the game to be viewed, it's annoying and it makes it more annoying when you lose games from it."

Stuart's criticism of the bunker comes after Matt Lodge was awarded a penalty in the dying stages of regular time on Saturday, which earnt the Warriors a penalty to tie the game up and force golden point, when Shaun Johnson would ultimately kick a field goal.

Lodge has since reportedly admitted to staying down to receive the penalty, with criticism widely following the incident - and not for the first time this year over consistency from the bunker.

 

[maxta]

I'm split .... there are times it works.
Like someone's foot skimming out before getting the ball down.
The scary part, they still often get obvious decisions wrong after 25 minutes deliberation.
Often takes the "momentum" out of the game and feels flat.
They are not alowed to rule on forward passes.
The 1 that infuriates me is this obstruction rule.....I get if a player takes out a defender "in a position to make a tackle" how it should work.
I have now seen 50% of these rulings, where the player has zero chance of getting within 10m of the attacker and worse still, defending players taking soccer dives to win the 'No try" call more and more.....same as this crusher tackle, attacker should have auto 15m on the sidelines to check this serious potential "spinal injury" as they seem to be 100% fine once the penalty is blown.

 

[jbb/james]

The bunker is weakening the standard of refereeing , as they dont make enough calls.

If you can send a player to the sin bin 4 minutes after an incident , then they can rule 1 play back. Its embarrasing

 

[mickqld]

The bunker should only rule on tries. Stop this rediculous searching for obstructions and supposed foul play. There's nothing in those events that needs that much scrutinty. If the ref misses it then so be it.

 

[Brisbane Tragic]

The bunker should only be involved in the act of scoring ie in the ball being placed past the tryline. The bunker should not be involved in anything else - they miss things - their advice on issues is hopeless for the referee - they are complete duds. Let the refs ref and let the bunker confirm if the ball gets on the ground in the in goal - nothing else.

 

[eaglebuzz]

I just wish players had the opportunity to trigger when the bunker is used. Keep them out of the game unless a team invokes a challenge. And maybe give each team a maximum of two incorrect challenges per game.

It's really unfair that a team can do something like commit a blatent knock-on or illegal strip the play before a try, that the referee misses, and so it's allowed to stand because the ref missed it. The captain's challenge should be allowed to be used for any infringement. Yes it will result in a couple of stoppages, which could be abused, but if the wrong call has been made the players should have the opportunity to challenge it.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

I think one positive is that there are more try’s being scored whereas in the past if there was any doubt it was a no.

But that’s the only positive , the rest is tripe !!

 

[HoldenV8]

The thing that is really pissing me off about the bunker right now is not the bunker officials constantly getting things wrong. We're used to that.

No, my beef is with the independent doctor(s) they have in there. All season so far we have seen players get taken off, sometimes minutes after the fact, for a HIA because the bunker doc has determined that there was a head clash, even the tiniest of ones, so player-X needs to come off for an assessment..... While laying on the ground for any length of time after being tackled usually see's a player taken off for a HIA.

So why did Matt Lodge get to lay around on the ground, holding his jaw/mouth from the phantom high shot he "took" and then was not taken for a HIA??? The amount of time he spend laying on the ground, the bunker doc should have had him straight off.

Last Saturday's Warriors vs Raiders game showed the complete failure that is having an independent doctor in the bunker and not actually at the ground itself. The NRL needs to show some balls, ax the bunker doc and just bite the bullet and go to the expense of having an independent doctor present at the ground on game day where they can asses players in person.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

So why did Matt Lodge get to lay around on the ground, holding his jaw/mouth from the phantom high shot he "took" and then was not taken for a HIA???

Yes Bunker is pretty inept but even they could see that Lodge was acting.

 

[HoldenV8]

Yes Bunker is pretty inept but even they could see that Lodge was acting.

So what if he was faking?? He got a penalty out of it so the referees at the time deemed it real. By its very definition, Lodge should have been off for a HIA.

My point is how can some doctor at NRL HQ in Sydney be responsible for assessing a HIA in Brisbane or Townsville or Melbourne. Hell, what's going to happen when the Warriors are back at Mount Smart?? Are we going to have a doctor in Sydney telling players in Auckland (another country no less), sorry you've got to come off for a HIA???

Just how stupid is this?? Its a serious eff up by the NRL. The independent doctor should be at the ground to assess players in person, not from some bunker in Sydney where they aren't even in contact with the players.

 

[HoldenV8]

And IMHO, I think there is an independent doctor in the bunker only because the NRL are doing it cheap. They don't want to go to the expense of actually having to pay for 8 different doctors to be at each ground each week.

Having one "doctor" in the bunker is a hell of a lot cheaper than having 8 at the grounds.....

 

[The Who]

The thing that is really pissing me off about the bunker right now is not the bunker officials constantly getting things wrong. We're used to that.

No, my beef is with the independent doctor(s) they have in there. All season so far we have seen players get taken off, sometimes minutes after the fact, for a HIA because the bunker doc has determined that there was a head clash, even the tiniest of ones, so player-X needs to come off for an assessment..... While laying on the ground for any length of time after being tackled usually see's a player taken off for a HIA.

So why did Matt Lodge get to lay around on the ground, holding his jaw/mouth from the phantom high shot he "took" and then was not taken for a HIA??? The amount of time he spend laying on the ground, the bunker doc should have had him straight off.

Last Saturday's Warriors vs Raiders game showed the complete failure that is having an independent doctor in the bunker and not actually at the ground itself. The NRL needs to show some balls, ax the bunker doc and just bite the bullet and go to the expense of having an independent doctor present at the ground on game day where they can asses players in person.

Tonight Kikou got poked in the eye and was allowed to get a free interchange because of an HIA? Does this mean any injury to the head, such as a scratch on the chin, mean you can rort the HIA rule?

 

[The Who]

The bunker should only be involved in the act of scoring ie in the ball being placed past the tryline. The bunker should not be involved in anything else - they miss things - their advice on issues is hopeless for the referee - they are complete duds. Let the refs ref and let the bunker confirm if the ball gets on the ground in the in goal - nothing else.

So, are you happy that they have to ignore obvious errors leading up to the "try"?

Technology has proven that you can't get everything right because ultimately a decision still relies on a human. We were sold a pup that the Bunker would improve refereeing standards. What it has done is confirm having one ref and a couple of sideline sidekicks will make some mistakes, but it is the best solution because that's the vagaries of sport. The NRL should save their millions and revert to how we controlled each match prior to technology. The ref makes a decision and, rightly or wrongly, it should be final.

 

[globaleagle]

What also looks ridiculous is when a try is scored and the bunker finds something wrong in reviewing it, they tell the ref to blow their whistle, make the big 'tv review' square sign and tell the bunker to check for the mistake that 1) the ref missed and 2) the bunker just told them about.

It's embarrassing.

ref ~awards a try~

bunker: "Psst, ref we have found an obstruction in the lead up to that try."

ref: ~blows the pea outta the whistle~ "Yeah, um, hey bunker.... I've got no try (now) and check for a possible obstruction"

 

[wedgetail eagle]

Obviously, it’s beyond the referee now, but I can see why the Melbourne Storm employed a Referee Whisperer on the field to try & combat this madness.

Manly should employ one…😉

 

[HoldenV8]

Tonight Kikou got poked in the eye and was allowed to get a free interchange because of an HIA? Does this mean any injury to the head, such as a scratch on the chin, mean you can rort the HIA rule?

 

[globaleagle]

View attachment 20981

At least Pandora's box had hope in the bottom of it.

Alas...with the nrl ...

 

[47MVEagle]

I can't believe the ref & touchies all missed Kikau's knock on in the lead up to one of Penrith's tries when everyone at the game, watching from home, & the commentators all saw it.

Of course, the bunker couldn't review & rule on it (despite several replays clearly showing it) because a tackle was made after it & before the try was scored.

Ridiculous.