Re: NRL Fantasy 2022 - Part 66 - Couch Party

ShadowSabre wrote:Interesting to see all the jaded and being turned off the game comments when over here in NZ it's Rugby union that's happening with and all the fans are actually turning to the NRL instead.
Been a league fan for a number of years and also a union fan too, but now all my die hard union mates think they are NRL experts after watching the last couple of seasons, makes me laugh some times.
Definitely think there's some problems with the way the NRL is run and some of the new rules, but no way it's anywhere near in the hole rugby union is these days

Milchcow wrote:

As a referee in my weekend comp - the refs association has said in the past they will always back us in complaints from teams as long as we are correct at law (ie get the rules right). We have the advantage of our game sot being filmed from multiple camera angles, and we don't have any media personalities critiquing us every week.
But as an example the Cowboys Manly final from a few years ago where Foran scored off a knock on wasn't a mistake at law - if they decide that Foran knocked back then allowing the try was the correct decision. The mistake was in not spotting the knock on - but at least they got the rules right. An example of a mistake at law would be a Tigers/Souths game from 2004 that went to golden point, but they forgot to have halftime in golden point and just kept playing after 5 minutes until someone scored. Obviously the rules say you have to have a half time so at that time the refs failed at law.

Ans in yesterday's game, the referees failed at law. You can't challenge a non-call from a ref. And you can only challenge at a stoppage. Referee hadn't blown full time so it failed at both counts.
The NRL likes changing its rules multiple times a season, so they'll probably retroactively make it a valid challenge. But its a terrible precedent - if they did allow that then we'll see challenges on almost every kick chase so I suspect it will be a one-off.

It also highlights why I hate NRL commentary. Many on Fox/9 may be talking about it being a terrible call, but they say that 3 or 4 times a game, so why would anybody care what they say.

Milchcow wrote:

As a referee in my weekend comp - the refs association has said in the past they will always back us in complaints from teams as long as we are correct at law (ie get the rules right). We have the advantage of our game sot being filmed from multiple camera angles, and we don't have any media personalities critiquing us every week.
But as an example the Cowboys Manly final from a few years ago where Foran scored off a knock on wasn't a mistake at law - if they decide that Foran knocked back then allowing the try was the correct decision. The mistake was in not spotting the knock on - but at least they got the rules right. An example of a mistake at law would be a Tigers/Souths game from 2004 that went to golden point, but they forgot to have halftime in golden point and just kept playing after 5 minutes until someone scored. Obviously the rules say you have to have a half time so at that time the refs failed at law.

Ans in yesterday's game, the referees failed at law. You can't challenge a non-call from a ref. And you can only challenge at a stoppage. Referee hadn't blown full time so it failed at both counts.
The NRL likes changing its rules multiple times a season, so they'll probably retroactively make it a valid challenge. But its a terrible precedent - if they did allow that then we'll see challenges on almost every kick chase so I suspect it will be a one-off.

It also highlights why I hate NRL commentary. Many on Fox/9 may be talking about it being a terrible call, but they say that 3 or 4 times a game, so why would anybody care what they say.

Milchcow wrote:

As a referee in my weekend comp - the refs association has said in the past they will always back us in complaints from teams as long as we are correct at law (ie get the rules right). We have the advantage of our game sot being filmed from multiple camera angles, and we don't have any media personalities critiquing us every week.
But as an example the Cowboys Manly final from a few years ago where Foran scored off a knock on wasn't a mistake at law - if they decide that Foran knocked back then allowing the try was the correct decision. The mistake was in not spotting the knock on - but at least they got the rules right. An example of a mistake at law would be a Tigers/Souths game from 2004 that went to golden point, but they forgot to have halftime in golden point and just kept playing after 5 minutes until someone scored. Obviously the rules say you have to have a half time so at that time the refs failed at law.

Ans in yesterday's game, the referees failed at law. You can't challenge a non-call from a ref. And you can only challenge at a stoppage. Referee hadn't blown full time so it failed at both counts.
The NRL likes changing its rules multiple times a season, so they'll probably retroactively make it a valid challenge. But its a terrible precedent - if they did allow that then we'll see challenges on almost every kick chase so I suspect it will be a one-off.

It also highlights why I hate NRL commentary. Many on Fox/9 may be talking about it being a terrible call, but they say that 3 or 4 times a game, so why would anybody care what they say.

Aardvark wrote:

Absolutely agree on the whole 'Boy who cried wolf' thing regarding the commentary....so many of their protests are in situations where the ref has made the right call according to the rules of the game but those arse clowns are banging on about 'common sense' or 'feel for the game'. When an actual mistakes happens it just blends in to the wall of mock outrage.

BCT05 wrote:

I don't have a problem with them being able to challenge, if it was a genuine howler and they weren't allowed to challenge instead then everyone would be blowing up about it in the opposite way. The ref did blow his whistle once Laurie was tackled (lightly touched) by Gilbert signaling a stoppage of play due to the time being up so I would've thought that is ok by the law? The intent of that rule is surely just to ensure active game flow is not constantly stopped by challenges, once time is up that is no longer an issue.

Milchcow wrote:

They still need a call to challenge. Rules clearly state you can't challenge a non-call, Were they challenging the decision to call full time?

You also can only challenge calls that result in a structured restart. There was no restart as the game was over, but even if it wasn't full time, the restart was a play-the-ball so not a valid challenge.

Its clear why they have limits on when challenges can be made, otherwise the game would be stopped all the time (or at least stopped all the time until they get a challenge wrong) to have a look at things, and nobody wants that.

Teams have gotten around this sometimes by deliberately conceding penalties in order to challenge the previous play - but although they've gotten away with it at times, its not supposed to be something they can do.

robelgordo wrote:From Lone Scout today, just want to check on this :

Jamal Fogarty guided the Raiders back from a 14-0 deficit to beat the Warriors and finished with 76 points, taking his three-game average above 50 and making him an exceptional point of difference with an ownership of less than one percent.

This is terrible analysis right? Like Fog is probably ok, but the use of 3 game average here is a shocker right?

robelgordo wrote:From Lone Scout today, just want to check on this :

Jamal Fogarty guided the Raiders back from a 14-0 deficit to beat the Warriors and finished with 76 points, taking his three-game average above 50 and making him an exceptional point of difference with an ownership of less than one percent.

This is terrible analysis right? Like Fog is probably ok, but the use of 3 game average here is a shocker right?

robelgordo wrote:From Lone Scout today, just want to check on this :

Jamal Fogarty guided the Raiders back from a 14-0 deficit to beat the Warriors and finished with 76 points, taking his three-game average above 50 and making him an exceptional point of difference with an ownership of less than one percent.

This is terrible analysis right? Like Fog is probably ok, but the use of 3 game average here is a shocker right?

rhinoceroo wrote:There was a game a couple of weeks ago (Dragons/Raiders? I can't fully remember) where the Dragons(?) were two up in the final seconds and were not square at the play-the-ball under the posts and the ref pointlessly blew six again but it caused the attacking team to butcher their play. Should have been a penalty at least in terms of the spirit of the game - had far more effect than anything that might have happened to a Cowboys player last night - but that's not really the point this time as iirc the Raiders(?) wanted to challenge but were told full-time had been called...

DarkKnight wrote:

Just went and watched the replay a number of times from the high shot and it’s Feldt who changes his line late to intentionally shoulder Kepaoa. He was 100% trying to make contact to get a penalty.

rhinoceroo wrote:There was a game a couple of weeks ago (Dragons/Raiders? I can't fully remember) where the Dragons(?) were two up in the final seconds and were not square at the play-the-ball under the posts and the ref pointlessly blew six again but it caused the attacking team to butcher their play. Should have been a penalty at least in terms of the spirit of the game - had far more effect than anything that might have happened to a Cowboys player last night - but that's not really the point this time as iirc the Raiders(?) wanted to challenge but were told full-time had been called...

Milchcow wrote:

As a referee in my weekend comp - the refs association has said in the past they will always back us in complaints from teams as long as we are correct at law (ie get the rules right). We have the advantage of our game sot being filmed from multiple camera angles, and we don't have any media personalities critiquing us every week.
But as an example the Cowboys Manly final from a few years ago where Foran scored off a knock on wasn't a mistake at law - if they decide that Foran knocked back then allowing the try was the correct decision. The mistake was in not spotting the knock on - but at least they got the rules right. An example of a mistake at law would be a Tigers/Souths game from 2004 that went to golden point, but they forgot to have halftime in golden point and just kept playing after 5 minutes until someone scored. Obviously the rules say you have to have a half time so at that time the refs failed at law.

Ans in yesterday's game, the referees failed at law. You can't challenge a non-call from a ref. And you can only challenge at a stoppage. Referee hadn't blown full time so it failed at both counts.
The NRL likes changing its rules multiple times a season, so they'll probably retroactively make it a valid challenge. But its a terrible precedent - if they did allow that then we'll see challenges on almost every kick chase so I suspect it will be a one-off.

It also highlights why I hate NRL commentary. Many on Fox/9 may be talking about it being a terrible call, but they say that 3 or 4 times a game, so why would anybody care what they say.