Referees boss Tony Archer has conceded the penalty that allowed Gareth Widdop to send Saturday’s NRL elimination final into extra time should not have been given.
Canterbury eventually came up 11-10 winners over St George Illawarra in golden point, courtesy of a Josh Reynolds field goal.
But not before a Widdop penalty goal after the siren forced the game into extra time.
After the Bulldogs went ahead 10-8 late in the match courtesy of a 78th minute Shaun Lane try, Widdop attempted a short kickoff from the re-start. The ball was knocked on by Sam Perrett before it bounced off his opposite winger Jason Nightingale and Lane picked it up.
Referee Jared Maxwell ruled that Lane was offside and awarded the Dragons a penalty, from which Widdop subsequently kicked a goal to level it up at 10-all.
But as Nightingale played at the ball, Lane was put onside, so a scrum should have been set with a Dragons’ feed instead of a penalty.
“For a player to remain offside under these circumstances, the referee needs to determine that the ball is touched by an opponent, without retaining it,” Archer said.
“The rules state that touching the ball means intentionally playing it with any part of the person – a ricochet or rebound does not count as a touch. The referee makes a live decision to penalise the Bulldogs, which cannot be reviewed by the video referee. Upon review of the match, it was determined that Nightingale, by contesting for the ball, is deemed to be playing at the ball.
“However, the referee did not have a clear view of the contact with Nightingale, and therefore could not rule definitely that Nightingale had intentionally played at the football.”
Archer, however backed his referees to continue to make calls over the next three weeks of the finals series as they see fit,
“Our match officials are charged to make decisions in real time and I always encourage them to back their judgment. I’ll continue to encourage them to do it over the remainder of the finals series,” Archer said.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Hi Adrian, I'm not going to argue with you. If it's your opinion that players shouldn't be smashed on the ground you're certainly entitled to it and it's definitely valid. But as I've been saying for a few days that's not how the rules stand at the moment. You can't retrospectively change the rules and apply a suspension to something that wasn't 'illegal' at the time. Kasiano was NEVER going to be suspended for that tackle. The rules don't allow it.
Wolly
Roar Guru
I agree with you most times TB but can't this time round. Boxing is a brutal sport all about punching and trying to dodge punches. But punches are prohibited below the belt and whilst the opponent is on the ground for a reason, to keep the fight clean and maintain the pugilists integrity. Same must apply here, smash a guy on his feet all you want (as long as it's legal) but there has to be limits sometimes. League is called 'the toughest game in the world' but there is nothing tough about smashing a defenceless guy on the ground. Nothing against the Bulldogs, it would rub me the wrong way seeing that even if my team was in those circumstances.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Thanks Steven...but I think you can just write losers you don't have to blank out the middle letters like a swear word...
steveng
Roar Rookie
Well "Julian" you mustn't have been watching the 2015 NRL season and what referees and the NRL officials have done and how they have affected certain clubs in the conp. And the “L*$#?S” is not a swear word its the truth "losers".
The Barry
Roar Guru
I want to know what the swear word is indicated by "L*$#?S"...
Wasted1
Guest
I saw both incidents, i've given up on sin binning of players for professional fouls. Player welfare and enforcing the rules isn't a priority of refs these days it seems. They're far to pre-occupied trying to help KFC advertise with video replays.
Julian
Guest
Been reading this site for a while and never come across a more deluded comment then yours.
steveng
Roar Rookie
Yeah, that is another incident that "Just Went Unnoticed" and its another one of the referees and NRL's illusion.
steveng
Roar Rookie
So what is Tony Archer going to do? Bugger all, just like he has done "All Season". The NRL is being officiated by a very poor bunch of "L*$#?S" who don't have any vision and/or regard for the fans and teams. Tony, just keep gaging the players, coaches and clubs, because that is the "Way To Go" in this refereeing and NRL dictatorship!
no one in particular
Roar Guru
If it costs the Dogs the game then Archer wouldn't admit they got it wrong, it would have been justified somehow
The Barry
Roar Guru
Maybe you should learn what a crusher tackle is - maybe you've never seen one. MRC have released their charges - no charge for Kasiano...
The Barry
Roar Guru
Yep. If scores were level that would have ended the dogs season on a very poor call. Thankfully it didn't happen but it's been threatening all season.
catcat
Roar Rookie
I saw that one and thought the same- unprofessional and poor sportsmanship. Speaking of which did anyone see Fifita trip a marker with his hand on a play-the-ball??
BlueNWhite
Guest
Maybe you should understand what a crusher tackle is. All Kasiano's was was just a hard tackle.
RT
Guest
The dogs really are the most aptly named team in the league.
jeandetroyes
Guest
“However, the referee did not have a clear view of the contact with Nightingale, and therefore could not rule definitely that Nightingale had intentionally played at the football.” It was a short kick off to regain possession - obviously Nightingale was contesting the ball. That's a terrible cop out by Archer and a howler from Maxwell that nearly cost a team a preliminary final's match. The error needs to be acknowledged if spectators are to have any respect or confidence in the referees.
Doc79
Roar Rookie
I would like archer to explain why adam blair was allowed to hold thurston out of a fifth tackle play in the 73min while offside? To me, that is a professional foul in any interpretation of the rules and should be 10mins in the bin. Hello tony???
Barick
Guest
It was a crusher tackle Barry, maybe you didn't see it? It needed to be put on report.
The Barry
Roar Guru
It's called a tackle mate. Are we banning tackles now? Maybe he hasn't commented on it because there's nothing there to comment on...
RT
Guest
But said nothing about binning or sending off the two Canterbury forwards for dangerously attacking a defenceless player on the ground? Go figure.