Watching the final 20 minutes of the Northern Pride’s excellent demolition of the East Tigers in the Queensland Cup final on Sunday at Lang Park, I couldn’t help but think that the farcical scenes we were watching could have been avoided.
The stupid thing is that there is no need to change any of the rules as they are now, just apply them on the field.
The NRL has made a big deal out of trying to improve the image of the game, off the back of Paul Gallen’s punch on Nate Myles.
This was the driving force behind the ‘one punch and 10 minutes in the bin’ rule that has arguably caused the niggly, scrappy nature of some of the games we have seen this season.
MORE NRL GRAND FINAL:
» Issac Luke can only blame himself if he misses the final
» TURNER: Bulldogs will show bite in the Grand Final over the Bunnies
» Dally M: Sharing is caring as Thurston and Hayne share medal
» NRL Grand Final hub
» Hayne and Sutton to referee NRL Grand Final
There have been enough column inches written about whether this one-punch rule is good or not, so I don’t want to go into that.
I want to talk about the absence of sin bins being used for any other offence in the game, and how placing a player on report is spineless.
On Sunday in the QRL Cup, just after half time, Pride forward Joel Reithmuller stamped on Troy Geiss’ stomach while he was prone on the floor having been tackled. If this wasn’t a send-off offence, then surely we have reached the point of anything goes – other than a punch.
The match was already 22-0 in favour of the Pride, so arguably game over. Such a stupid rush of blood to the head could have cost Reithmuller’s team something. Instead, he was put on report.
This did nothing to help Easts, who perhaps could have used the time with a man advantage to make a small comeback. I’m not suggesting for a second that they would have gone on to win, but playing against 12 men could have resulted in a score and change in momentum.
But Reithmuller’s indiscretion cost the Northern Pride nothing.
It did however, lay the foundations for what happened next.
More niggle, the decent into scrappy, unattractive football, a late hit on Easts player Cody Walker by Ethan Lowe, and then the all-in-brawl that marred the final.
Ricky Thorby and Kenny Bromwich were both sent to the sin bin for their part (and punches) in the brawl, and were soon joined by Easts captain Steve Thorpe, who was sent off for dissent.
I would argue that had the referee used his ability to send off Reithmuller at the time of his stamp, he could have calmed the tension that was simmering between the two teams, and the game could have continued to be a fine advert for the Queensland Cup.
Although not to the same extent as in this game, similar things have happened in many NRL games this season.
Indiscretions are constantly placed on report, building the tension between the teams and reducing the game as a spectacle. I don’t have the statistics on how many of these incidents result in bans at the judiciary (although to be fair, that’s hardly the best indication of a players guilt), but they tend to have been reviewed by the video referee, so are fairly serious.
Why have the referees lost their bottle? Have they been told to keep every player on the pitch at all costs? Teams need to be penalised for indiscipline in games, not after the fact.
If referees can’t be trusted to make important, match-defining decisions, then why are they there? Putting players on report is gutless, and needs to be addressed.
Allowing the constant niggle and scrappiness that is symptomatic of many games this year is arguably a much bigger issue affecting the image of the game than two blokes punching each other.
Steve Bates
Roar Rookie
Thanks Simon - top stuff.
Hutchoman
Roar Pro
I'm not really sure where the idea that someone would get binned for walking off the mark came from? We're talking about foul play, "professional fouls" or constant infringing.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
I think that's the biggest point of the article and the problem with the system that we have now. It simply doesn't penalise the offending team at the time when the offence is taking place. There is nothing to stop opposition players targeting the opposition and just copping the ban next week.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
I certainly wouldn't want to see players sent to the bin for minor offences like walking off the mark, or straying offside. I'd rather that when players scream at the referee, or stamp on another player, or swing an arm etc etc.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
And that is a perfect way for it to be used. Unfortunately, if this is still the case, the NRL has the most inept officials of any sport in the world because they don't see anything!
Rod
Guest
For the life of me. I cannot understand why with it being a 17 man game. If player commits a send off offence, expel them from the game, bring on a replacement player(it's still 13 on 13) The offending team loses an interchange, one down on the bench. If the opposition player cannot continue playing the 18th man comes into the bench. Takes the pressure away from the ref, the team that offends gets punished , the opposition gets the advantage.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
I have bagged refs as well. I hate how the review system is used, I hate how the keep they defence back 10 metres, if the shadow is on the line, fair enough. I hate how the players now talk to refs and this is after the supposed crackdown. The problem for the refs is that if they do something then the media comes out accusing them of spoiling the game. This same media also then complain about players inside the 10, backchat and that players should be binned or sent off. As was said earlier, they are on a hiding to nothing. Do something and they get slammed, do nothing and they get slammed. The biggest issue facing referees is that their decisions can make or break a game much more so now than in days gone bye. Back then a referee's error could be overcome by winning a scrum against the feed, striking and winning the play the ball, stripping the ball in days when ball security meant something. Yes, those days are gone but we never had the problems with referees that we do now,
Cadfael
Roar Guru
The whole point of the reporting system was that if the referee and touch judge were unsighted, the incident was put on report for the MRC. It was never set up so the referees could abrogate their duties.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
That is their game not ours. There is a downside. I watched a grand final a few years ago, one team was a bunch of up and comers and the other an team of old hard heads. They made mincemeat out of the youngsters and got something like 26 weeks worth of suspensions out of it. The joke is that with all the suspensions it didn't help the other team on the day. If you want that type of a set up, fair enough.
Storm Boy
Guest
Forget suspensions and impose fines plus take it off the club's salary cap. 1. Fine the player and make sure he pays the NRL from his own bank account. 2. Deduct the same amount of the fine from the club's salary cap for the current season. So what if they are getting punished twice. Too bad. Plus all the money from fines should go to junior clubs and school teams.
Paul
Guest
Agree 100% I was at the game and the stomp in days gone by would have been a send off offence not put on report with East's gaining no advantage. In fact they where at a disadvantage as Geiss had to leave the field injured. I don't like to criticise ref's as it's a tough thankless job but on this occasion Sir you lost control which resulted in the ongoing niggle for the rest of the game. As an Easts supporter congratulations to the NP who were the better team on the day, just disappointing East's had no chance with been bashed giving them no chance to make the game respectable
cedric
Guest
yes, the report system has morphed into the refs not binning or sending off. Maybe they have been told to do that or they are worried they might make the wrong call at the time. Well for not binning or sending off, that is the wrong call; for instance, Sims should have been binned in my book, and all those types of offences would quickly slow up. Then not many on report, maybe just the bad ones.
Robz
Guest
My understanding was the initial introduction of the on report system was for incidents that the referees didn't quite see what happened, but they realise it was something questionable. This has morphed into a system of it as an out and refusing to actually make a call on foul play
Robz
Guest
Agree 100% Albo! Sending players from the field is the easiest way to get this crap out of the game. If being off for 10 minutes swings the game wildly in favour of the opposition so be it - pretty sure the player's teammates and coach will very quickly sort them out. The other big problem with the "on report" rather than sinbin is that the team infringed against gets minimal to no advantage (in fact they are often at the greatest disadvantage due to being reduced to 16 players total for the rest of the game) - but the team/s playing the infringing team in the following week/s get the advantage of not having to play against that often top line player if he gets suspended.
The Barry
Guest
The refs called a high shot on SB and went to go to the video ref. then SBW got up and they called it off. I never said TV gets to choose. My point is that the refs changed their call on the basis that SBW got up. Because he got up they never went upstairs, because of that there was no penalty or report which meant no citing. Those are facts not open to any interpretation. I don't want SB to miss the GF but if this was a round 5 game it would be a different story. SBW actually got up and didn't milk a penalty. You can say what you like about him but the bloke doesn't stay down.
The Barry
Guest
Yes
Alex L
Roar Rookie
More sin bins would be good if used correctly -- the blatantly intended illegalities like the Burgess chicken wing on Matai for example, reality is though a lot of the reports (like JWH getting reported for hitting Brent Kite high when Kite was falling or T-Rex getting reported because his arm bounced up off the ball and hit Mansour high) shouldn't even be reports and if they were sin bins it'd be monumentally unfair.
tigerdawes
Guest
You forgot to mention that the injured Tigers player left the field , while the Pride player was able to still take part in the game. We see this so many times in league. A player is hit high and suffers concussion. He is then taken from the field and if he fails a concussion test takes no further part in the game and may also miss the following week. Maybe teams will start targeting key players to weaken the other side. Send the offender off until the injured player returns leaving the side one man down. If the injured player doesn't return then leave the offender off. I really thought Reithmuller should have been sent for the game.
up in the north
Guest
I'm sure we'd all like the game to be well policed on the field if only to reduce the number of negative articles wriiten about it. Some of the ideas suggested have merit and it would be great if the powerbrokers listened to the fans for a change. Keep the rage.
Jimbo Jones
Guest
The problem is always going to be about consistency though. Also, for that example - When Inglis walks a metre off the mark, should a player really get sin binned for that?