If your captain is a grub, it is going to cost you

Bill Harrigan is the best referee we’ve ever seen – just ask him. But he was.

He commanded every game with the arrogance of a Supreme Court judge with a mullet. He knew he was right, he knew he was in charge and he told the players – no matter whether it was Brad Fittler or Gorden Tallis – exactly how it was and how it was going to be.

In the age when video reviews were only used by commentators to deride wrong decisions by the whistle blowers, Harrigan invariably got the calls right.

Harrigan’s greatest downfall occurred because he believed that he could actually be in charge of a game, rather than just an ancillary adjudicator of the events.

It happened one night in July 2002, when Harrigan sent four Parramatta players to the sin bin in a 20-minute period. Harrigan was right to do it. The Eels players were holding their Knights opposition down in the tackle deliberately.

Bill warned and penalised them for it repeatedly. They didn’t listen. He took decisive action.

And then the NRL hung him out to dry.

Not only did they barely defend him publicly, he was made to back down, attend a Parramatta team training session and was then – bizarrely – stood down for a week.

Harrigan was right. He knew the rules, he’d followed the right process. He’d provided warnings and he took the right action when he was repeatedly ignored. Unsurprisingly, referees have been rather gun shy about sin binning players since Bill was punished for doing his job properly.

Now we are treated every weekend to a myriad of cynical acts designed to slow the oppositions play down. Teams know they won’t get binned for them because no ref wants to get shafted like Harrigan was.

Ironically the first of the players he sent to the bin that night was the current chair of the match review committee, Michael Buettner. “You won’t cop a warning, have a spell,” Harrigan said to him as he sent him on his way.

This week Buettner and his committee had to figure out exactly what to charge James Graham, David Klemmer and Michael Lichaa with, after their histrionics towards referee Gerard Sutton. Buettner was being warned again – act quickly and act decisively, or referees will have their power further eroded.

Personally, I think that the punishments that Graham and Klemmer received fell short. I thought the NRL needed to make a very big statement about what would be tolerated and what would not. Three weeks for their vile, bullying behaviour wasn’t enough.

My admiration for Gerard Sutton has gone through the roof. Making the right call under such heated circumstances, demonstrates that he is a very competent ref. The rules are very clear on protecting the kicker.

Graham’s charge down was at very best, reckless. It went straight through Reynolds’ supporting leg and smashed it. There is no world in which it was not a penalty. None. Anybody who says otherwise just likes reckless violence or is badly biased by allegiance – or both.

That Sutton then withstood the withering and threatening behaviour of Klemmer and Graham with a cool head while getting the ruling spot on, speaks volumes for the man. If I had been in his place I would have apologised profusely, wet my pants, reversed the decision and given them my wallet.

At the beginning of the season I was extremely disappointed to see that one of the best officials – Daniel Eastwood – had been dropped from the ranks of the touch judges. Not only is he a great guy, he is a superb touchie.

The amount of times I’ve seen him call tough decisions live and get them right can’t be counted on all my digits. When I enquired with a few of the officials as to why he had been booted, the general consensus was a lack of speed, but he always seemed pretty quick to me. And what is the point of getting to the play first if you get the call wrong?

The official I spoke to agreed that Daniel was one of the best decision makers. Surely getting the call right is the number one required talent, Mr Archer?

I just hope that Gerard Sutton is both appreciated and lauded for his superb decision making last Friday. He should be listed to do this Sunday’s Dragons-Bulldogs match to make it clear to the Bulldogs and their fans that last Friday’s behaviour was unacceptable and that Sutton was right.

If not, we risk a repeat of the fiasco of 2002 when Graham Annesley stood Harrigan down for a week because he didn’t think of “the big picture.”

I think the Bulldogs have to have a good look at what sort of team they want to be. That they look like they will retain Graham as captain of their club beggars belief. It basically condones his behaviour. It tells all the bottle throwers that you – Ms Castle – also believe that the Dogs were robbed by bad officiating.

Do you agree with them? Is that why you are keeping James as captain?

When Canterbury club legend George Peponis can say this, “I think it highlights the supporters’ frustration over this year, and the last 18 months, about the refereeing standard which is appalling – as far as I’m concerned,” it seems fairly clear that the Bulldogs think that they were hard done by.

Then we get this from Paul Kent on Fox Sports News, “I think James Graham is the perfect guy now that can actually start fixing this up because he’s the guy that the Bulldogs fans really respond to. He has a bit of white line fever but you know that’s why we love him.”

I don’t love him Paul. I think he’s a thug and a bully.

“A bit of white line fever” is not an adequate description or justification for a bloke who bit an opponent’s ear. While I looked at the replays closely from last year’s grand final, I could find no clear evidence that Graham deliberately lead with his head to break Sam Burgess’ cheekbone and knock Dave Tyrell out.

As well, examination of the Reynolds hit last Friday shows his head faced away from the Souths halfback whose season he is ending.

But here is the thing: once James bit Billy’s ear back in 2012 it makes you wonder whether his actions are deliberate every time something bad happens around him. A bloke who can bite an opponent, well, where is their line? Do they even have a line?

When the ref sees a 50-50 incident involving Kieran Foran there is surely something in the back of their mind that says, “it’s Kieran, he doesn’t do that.” Conversely, if a ref sees a possible incident involving the likes of Gallen, Beau Scott, Nate Myles, Greg Bird or James Graham – just for example – do they have a predisposition to rule against them because of their past records?

Have those players lost the benefit of the doubt? And if they have, is it not a very poor piece of strategy to have them as your captain?

You’re damn right it is.

When Wayne Bennett made Gorden Tallis the Brisbane captain all those years ago it turned out to be a master stroke. It took the edge of white line stupidity out of Tallis’ game. He took responsibility for the team and severely moderated his behaviour.

When James Graham completely misplaced his excrement last Friday, it demonstrated that the captaincy had not affected him in the same way. In fact, his appalling leadership example probably accounted for two of his charges then going similarly berserk at Sutton.

Now they are also suspended. In one moment of stupidity and craziness Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs captain James Graham went from losing his side one game to maybe losing as many as four.

If they still want to keep him as their on-field leader after that, they’ll only have themselves to blame when it invariably happens again.

Whatever.

Good on you, Gerard.