As time goes by and special moments sail deeper into the realm of history, the more thorough our analyses of these events become.
Like anything moderately subjective, there will be an array of perspectives concerning the features of the event that are considered to be pivotal to the ultimate result.
In rugby league, close encounters in big games, predominantly taking place in the final series, will be discussed and debated by fervid supporters for the best part of their lifetimes.
The most recent NRL grand final between the Sydney Roosters and the Manly Sea Eagles qualifies for this score and would go down in history as one of the game’s classic contests.
The final score of 26-18 suggests in itself that this was a tight fought battle, but this is only a negligible fragment of just how great a spectacle it was.
The lead changed on four occasions and the momentum shifted even more frequently.
What’s most significant is that this classic, akin to previous colossal encounters, had several moments that were contentious and critical to the final score line.
Which moments will stand the test of time and remain hot topics of dispute for generations to come?
In the grand final of 2003, with the scores locked at 6-6, forward Scott Sattler famously chased down flying winger Todd Byrne and tackled him by the bootlaces in the 54th minute to prevent a certain try.
In 1997, Shannon Nevin missed a relatively straightforward penalty goal that would’ve given Manly an eight point lead with less than 15 minutes on the clock, putting them in a comfortable position.
Parramatta fans still harbour resentment for their preliminary final loss to the Bulldogs in 1998 after holding a commanding 16-point lead with 10 minutes left on the clock.
Paul Carriage never played another first grade game after shouldering the brunt of the blame for his side’s capitulation.
But should Brian Smith have kept playmaker John Simon on the field?
What if the Eels took full advantage of an exhausted bulldogs defensive line and thrust the nail in the coffin by opting to search for another four-pointer rather than shank a number of miserable field goal attempts?
Similarly, Tigers fans continue to rue Warren Ryan’s decision to bench star forwards Steve Roach and Paul Sironen in the dying stages of the 1989 Winfield Cup, which went into extra time.
But what if Ben Elias’s gallant attempt at a field goal had have had an extra knot of wind behind it?
These poor old die hards of the orange and black were still getting over their grand final loss from the previous year, in which their brilliant import Ellery Hanley had been knocked unconscious from a dirty Terry Lamb hit midway through the first half.
“The Black pearl” never returned to the field and many attribute his early departure as the cause of the Toger’s loss.
More importantly it is still widely believed that this was a deliberate tactic employed by Lamb to nullify the potency of their opponent’s attack.
In this year’s equivalent there are a number of possible instances that will spark discussion.
Should the Roosters have been awarded a penalty to give them an 8-6 lead for a hand in the play the ball or should Warea-Hargreaves been penalised and possibly sent to the bin for a head-butt?
Why weren’t the Sea Eagles awarded a scrum 20 metres from the roosters line for a dangerous last minute attacking opportunity when Michael Jennings clearly stuck his leg out and sent the ball into touch?
How didn’t the touch judge see that the penultimate pass in the match-winning try from Maloney to Minichello went a metre and a half forward?
And what about David Williams?
No matter how single-minded one is, they can surely confess that Manly were dealt a rough hand when it came to refereeing decisions and fate on Sunday evening.
It will take supreme strength of character and resilience to wait patiently and develop once again a formidable side over the next 12 months, capable of atoning for their misfortune.
Regardless of whether they do it successfully or not, this game is gone, inscribed and sealed in every sporting almanac without the possibility of Marty McFly entering the Delorean time machine and rewriting it. But it shall never be forgotten.
Clint
Guest
I'll have to watch the game again to see where the ref's decisions seem to favour the trailing side, but off the top of my head I can think of a few that don't. The Williams-Jennings obstruction happened when Manly were in front (shortly after the penalty try) and the Horo-Pearce obstruction happened at the first try when it was 0-0. The forward pass happened when Roosters were behind, so that one is fair enough, but the one where Jenko put a toe on the ball happened when the Roosters were in front (8-6 with 30 seconds to go in the first half).
Froggo
Guest
No-one mentions that it was a great game because all the 50-50 reffing decisions in the latter part of the first half and the entire second half went to the team behind on the scoreboard. That was Easts but soon as they got in front they went to Manly eg Buerher stripping JWH in a tackle at 71 mins and not penalized. Someone raised this the other day and I didn't believe it but one of the Fox replays didnt show the Maloney forward pass for Roosters try (only the head on shot) which is hard to believe but the full replay did. The Fox commentators didn't mention the forward pass at all - Channel Nine to their credit did. The Fox commentators didn't criticize any rulings - bizarre - master has written about this...
Clint
Guest
I agree with you Jake. There were rough calls both ways. You get sick of hearing about the forward pass call too. There was a sequence of events leading up to that try that Manly could have controlled, but the supporters and journalists would rather focus on an off-the-hip forward pass as the sole reason why the Roosters scored. If the pass had gone backwards, they still would have scored. It's a technicality, but no real advantage. If we compare it to Manly's first try when the lead runner takes out Pearce and prevents SBW from making cover defense, we get a situation where the ref's influence, or lack thereof, may have changed the game. If Pearce isn't obstructed the defense slides early, SBW wraps around for cover defense unimpeded and the try scorer gets pushed out. If the lead runner is not involved in that play, there is potentially no try scored. It was worth a look upstairs and normally the video ref gets a look at these sort of tries, but there was no luck this time. There's 4 points for Manly that are contentious. What about when Williams took out Jennings chasing a grubber in goal about 5 minutes after the penalty try got awarded? Knowing what Jennings is capable of, had Williams not taken him out, that could very well have been a try. There should have been a penalty there.
Jake Thornton
Roar Rookie
Roosters copped their fair share of strange refereeing decisions as well the Ballin strip on JWH that was called a knock-on is one that comes to my mind immediately, along with Lyon blocking Jennings multiple times (I know he did it to I am just saying) and the penalty try (though i agree with that one). I am sure there were countless others. Also that Maloney pass was one that gets missed 9 times out of 10. When minichiello recieved the ball he was still behind maloney, it was on a break so the refs werent in line, the video refs arent allowed to call on forward passes. I believe that Maloney made a genuine attempt to pass it backwards, t that pace it just doesn't happen. laws of physics.