Dear Manly elite, Two issues I've noticed recently and instead of making 2 threads for no one to read I've combined them in one slim looking thread. Firstly: The quick tap. To wrap myself, I just knew the referees would not adjust their refereeing style to accommodate the intent of this new rule's implementation. In the NRL's effort to speed up the game, and get more football played in the 80 mins a rule allowing players to take a quick tap after certain infringements was introduced. The referee has to 'give the mark' as to where the player can take a quick tap. The only thing not quick about this is the referee actually giving the mark! Union has it all over league in this respect; to the point that as long as the player taps it around where the infringement occurred, their ref's allow the game to flow and play on is ruled. The NRL refs have to realise, again, that the game isn't about them and either point to the mark immediately, and or allow the game to continue as long as the player taking the tap hasn't run metre's away from the mark before doing so. This can be easily fixed with a bit of education for our esteemed referees. Again, I just knew they wouldn't get it when I read about the rule but I'm still surprised that part 1 of the rule can be brought in (quick taps allowed) but part 2 is never discussed (refs, make sure you give the mark quickly). Let's hope it's fixed soon. Secondly: Marker's square. This should not be a penalty anymore. The game has matured of late by not penalising players passing the ball after the call of held from the ref's. Instead they are made to replay the ball. Everyone likes the rule, there's no dramas. Marker's not being square has become a subjective interpretation from the referee's visual standpoint. I'm not sure if the rule book states in centimetre terms what entails a square marker, and the angle of the referee to the player can confuse the true angle of the player marking up (similar to the reason why video ref's can't adjudicate on forward passes.) The problem I have with a penalty given for this infringement is that it is a subjective call which at its worst allows a biased referee to massively help his desired side. Looking at one of Buhrer's penalties for not being square...he could not have been any more square if he had a....set square to mark out his territory. It's becoming a massive penalty for a minor infraction. These days balls can be kicked easily upwards of 50 metres giving the team receiving the penalty huge gains in field position. Quite often the ref does not 'have time' to warn the offending player and the first the player knows they are not square in the ref's eyes is when the whistle blows. It's too easily (again, at its worst) for ref's to piggy back their favoured team out of trouble. Before the ref's act all indignant at that comment, remember that Bill Harrigan, the games most respected ref admitted upon his retirement that he and all ref's go into games with preconceived bias towards certain players who they, again, perceive to be habitual perpetrators of certain illegal moves. IE: They targeted players for penalties. Just like the video ref can not adjudicate on forward passes (the knights and Canberra should be thankful for that as yesterday's game would have finished 0-0), it's a bit much in this new age of a fast game that on field ref's can correctly judge to the centimetre if a player is marking square or not. Either call the player out of the play (then you can penalise if he makes a tackle) or replay the ball. After all, shouldn't the NRL be striving to allow the players the decide the result of games, and not the referees?