With the 2016 NRL season drawing to a close, it’s the perfect time to take a look back at some of the key points to take from the year that’s been.
The Match Review Committee requires an extreme makeover
The idea of having former rugby league players on the Match Review Committee (MRC) panel was a sound one. These blokes have played the game, and should have a better feel for adjudicating on-field indiscretions than the rest of us.
However, it would seem that ex-footy players can be crippled by the same issues off the field that haunted them throughout their playing careers.
During his time with the Parramatta Eels, North Sydney Bears, Northern Eagles and Wests Tigers, Michael Buettner’s form had more troughs than the men’s toilets at ANZ Stadium. Sadly, this inconsistency has carried through to his new role as the coordinator of the MRC. His dramatic dip in form has led to a loss of confidence and ultimately poor decision-making. Judge Reinhold could have delivered a better brand of justice.
The problem is a complete lack of common sense or consistency. Certain players are given a one-week ban for touching a referee, while others (generally of higher profile) escape sanction on a technicality. Sam Kasiano received only a two-week ban for deliberately kicking someone in the face, while Josh Reynolds was not even suspended for repeatedly attempting to trip an opponent.
I shudder to think what a player would need to do to warrant a 6-8-week ban these days, but it would likely involve a body bag. The current system is dysfunctional and untenable, and I don’t believe a couple of minor changes will be enough to fix it. Time to get Scotty Cam on the blower, as a complete rebuild is needed.
Come on JT, just retire already
They say that if we experienced a nuclear holocaust, only the cockroaches would survive. I’d suggest that even if the roaches took over the Earth, they’d still lose to Queensland. The Maroons are just that good.
Sadly, it was another painful State of Origin campaign for NSW fans. Coach Laurie Daley made significant changes to a side historically thrashed in Game III of the 2015 series, but it made no difference. Even with a new coach and the loss of several backline mainstays, the Queenslanders handled the Blues with consummate ease.
Sure, we snagged the Origin equivalent of a broken contraceptive, but who cares right? The series was over, and we lost. Again. The truth is, after 11 years of misery, it’s time for NSW fans to finally face the facts: we won’t win another State of Origin series until Thurston et al hang up the boots.
So let’s take the sensible, mature approach, and place all our hopes of future success on the shoulders of Nathan Cleary. Over to you Nath.
Money can’t buy you love
Apparently, it can’t buy you good officiating either. Despite spending a couple of million bucks on a video refereeing mothership, the same old problems remain.
Decisions are inconsistent from week to week and many rulings are seemingly at odds with the video evidence, much to bewilderment of fans, players and especially coaches. Rather than formulating a solution, the NRL have just given us a scapegoat: the Bunker.
I’m not here to trash the Bunker. The concept makes sense. If the technology is available and reliable, we’d be foolish to ignore the means to make decisions faster and more accurate.
The important point the NRL must take from this experience is that the Bunker is only as good as those who are using it. It’s no good having all these additional camera angles available if we’re unable to interpret them.
What’s been made patently clear is that you cannot simply introduce a concept like the Bunker, force feed it an archaic NRL rule book, and expect the two to get along.
During the off-season, it would be prudent for the NRL to review the interpretation of several rules (eg obstruction) and deliver a clear mandate to those in the Bunker. Only then can they aim for the holy trinity of consistency, technology and common sense.
Origin hangover worse than cask wine
Every season, the same old complaints are raised around the scheduling of State of Origin: it’s too taxing on the players involved and it’s unfair on the clubs.
And for years, these complaints have fallen on deaf ears. After all, television rights pay the bills. Origin is the centrepiece of rugby league, so the NRL has no qualms in shamelessly flogging it to the highest bidder.
It’s a tightly held secret that Origin was almost sold to a wealthy Chinese investor, however he pulled out upon realising he wasn’t bidding on a two-bedroom apartment in Artarmon.
In all fairness to the NRL, it’s hard to take the anguished cries from teams like the Broncos, Roosters, Storm and Bulldogs seriously. Although these sides often sacrifice the most players during the Origin period, it rarely impacts their success on the field. This year, however, things were a little different.
At the conclusion of Round 12, the Sharks, Broncos and Cowboys were sitting first, third and fourth on the ladder respectively. Each team was in sparkling form, with the two Queensland sides looking almost unbeatable.
But then Origin happened.
These three teams committed a total of 17 players to either NSW or Queensland , and each felt the weight of such heavy representation. The Broncos were the first to feel the pinch, winning only two of nine games during the Origin period, and were at one stage in danger of missing the Finals. The Sharks went four rounds without tasting victory after feasting on success for almost four months, and the Cowboys struggled to get back into the groove, losing three on the trot and almost missing out on a top four spot.
Everyone knows the current format stinks. There is simply no way to create a fair and equitable schedule with so many players missing on Origin duty.
My suggestion, based on zero research and minimal consideration, would be to treat the league like a 90s sitcom, and go on a mid-season hiatus to accommodate the Origin juggernaut. Hit the live pause button, play the Origin series in back to back weeks along with the Pacific Island Tests and other novelty fixtures to flesh out the scheduling, and then press play again.
It works in the Super Rugby, it works in soccer, and it can work in rugby league. But as the idea smacks of common sense, you can rule a line through it.
Prepare yourself for Origin Hangover Part II.
Follow Taking it One Week at a Time throughout the 2016 NRL season on The Roar, by liking our Facebook page or registering your email address on our blog.
Griffo
Guest
Like in game 1 when the blues "didn't get beaten"?
Cedric
Guest
I believe your right on most of what you say. But I am not going to accept the obviously bad calls. There are 8 games a week and usually, maybe, 2 or 3 bad mistakes, which to me are beyond belief. I just don't know how they get these bad calls sooooo wrong????
The Barry
Roar Guru
The ex players are definitely too sympathetic. As for Kasiano the suspension could have been anywhere from 3-6 weeks and it would be difficult to argue. But that's part of the problem. The judicial process is so murky that it's never clear what a player might end up with. If a player touches a ref this weekend who will call the penalty with any degree of confidence? What about a shoulder charge? A trip? It shouldn't be this grey. We should be able to estimate what the penalty will be from the moment the incident occurs, with a small margin either side.
Rob
Guest
Players have always baited opponents unfortunately. Those day are gone because it is a professional sport now. Officials should start bringing players into line about what is acceptable behaviour. Fafita gets 1 week for SOS GARBAGE should get 6, Kasiano 2 weeks should be 4-6. Patting opposition on the head 10 in bin. Peptides 12 months. Pearce got a worst punishment for being a goose drinking.
Tom Rock
Expert
I think Goddard is still nursing his bruised knuckles after Joey headbutted his fist
Craig
Guest
I'm really disappointed nobody ever really got ahold of Ennis in that era. Where is Jamie Goddard when you need him?
The Barry
Roar Guru
Origin won't change for the foreseeable future because there's not a suggestion that will continue to provide the revenue and exposure that Wednesday night Origin provides. The well balanced roster argument is a nonsense. Sure your 25 man squad may handle the Origin period better than a top heavy roster but is likely to get blown away in the semis. How many teams with solid 25 man rosters (as opposed to top heavy teams loaded with stars) have won premierships lately? How will Penrith's roster go if they have Merrin, Moylan, Cartwright, Mansour and Cleary playing Origin next year? The coaches have a valid point...their season gets torn up by having four to six players missing or backing up through Origin. But I agree that they know going in and one way or another should have a strategy to deal with it. I don't recall too many origin players being rested this year, other than when injured or suspended. I haven't heard Hasler complain about Origin other than when Josh Morris was let go as 18th man by NSW but then drafted back into the squad on the morning of the Dogs Sunday game against the Raiders with no prior notice. Which seems a valid point.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Just as an aside, Ennis is someone I give a little bit more credit to because he did it for a decade before punches were outlawed and has lived by the sword. There are a few blokes getting around now who were church mice until two years ago and are now out there throwing their weight around.
Nat
Roar Guru
NOIP, I agree that Origin is and will continue to be successful in it's current format. Where I would disagree with you is the relative simplicity in which a "well balanced 25 man roster" will draw success over 24 rounds. Successful teams have marque players who take a high % of the cap. Fair chance those guys are going to rep for State so you lose those marque players for 6-7 weeks you also lose combinations, forward power and maturity. Or to use your Broncos example, they have 6 of their best playing 3 games in 8 days. Injury and fatigue can be the only result. Bennett, Green, Bellamy and Flanagan would love a back up forward pack and a spare JT, Cronk or Smith. The simple fact is no one can replace pure talent so when the inevitable "slump" happens, it is the right of the coach to remind the ravenous press of the commitments his team face. If they do call for a review, understand they are not looking at it from a fan prospective but a player management POV.
Pomoz
Roar Rookie
Good article. I agree SOO should be stand alone. Those who say that it is the pinnacle of the game ignore the fact that without the NRL, SOO wouldn't exist. The foundations of the game must be looked after above all else. It is not a good look for the NRL when games are played with players missing because they are in SOO camp. Why dilute the product and show mediocrity for a few cheap ratings wins. The ratings may take a hit at first as people get used to a new schedule, but they will bounce back. There is an opportunity to make it a "rep weekend" with aboriginal and pacific island teams and an NRL allstars type concept so there is more than just one game. NZ vs England, much more could be done. The MRC has been appalling for a while. McKendry gets a week for touching the ref. JT and Smith do exactly the same. Nothing. Silence. Crickets. Whether you agree with the principle of suspension for touching the ref (I don't. It should only apply if it is done aggressively) or not, it should be applied consistently. I have no doubt that the rules are applied differently depending on who the player is and who he plays for. If you injure a player and it is deemed to be due to carelessness, not an accident (you could argue James hit on Tedesco was an accident), then why shouldn't you be suspended for as long as that player is out injured? You break a players jaw in a careless head high tackle, then you sit out the game for the period that player is out injured. You might concentrate a bit harder when swinging that arm in next time. Having players on the MRC is great in principle, but in reality they always start from the basis of "he didn't mean it" and "when I was playing I hated being suspended". In other words, I think they take the viewpoint of the offender too much. It is the only way to explain some of the ludicrous decisions they have come up with. Two weeks for kicking Parker in the face and then carrying on like a muppet afterwards? That was a disgraceful act of violence worth at least a month out. Get players involved in creating the punishment and grades for offences, but let lawyers decide whether they are guilty or not and to decide the sentence.
Pomoz
Roar Rookie
Cedric, the fact is, the Bunker will make wrong calls sometimes. There are humans in the centre of the technological palace and they make mistakes. We just have to accept that it will happen from time to time, but rarely enough that it isn't a systemic issue. oVer a season, dud calls by refs and the bunker even out, you win some you lose some.
Pomoz
Roar Rookie
Well said TB.
Cedric
Guest
Gotta bring up the two obstructions against Warriors again, ok and again; I see Tony Archer has now said the first one was a try and was wrongly overturned by the bunker. But the second one was obstruction; if you've viewed the 2nd one you will see Johnson run behind 2 dummy runners and Woods runs up and runs into the dummy runners and throws his arms in the air. I agree not a good look, but I do see this done alot and generally there's no refs call on it. I would say to any team playing the Storm, who I believe have the most dummy runners, continually run up and into the runners, if there is any consistency the Storm will be penalised out of the game!
Chris
Guest
I was ashamed of the image of the NRL seeing the visiting Hawaii NCAA Football team watching the Souths v Sharks game in an all most empty stadium ANZ...they most think that no one cares about this little sport :(. Maybe the fans in Sydney wouldn't care if they replaced Union and League with VicBall (AFL), Chavball (Soccer) and No Fun League (NFL).
no one in particular
Roar Guru
Origin isn't broken, so no need to touch it, no alternative needed. Clubs have had 35 years to sort out how to handle the Origin period. Not one has worked out that a well balanced 25 man roster will do you better over 24 rounds. It allows for impact of injuries and rest, rather then a top heavy roster headed by highly paid rep players. Looking at New Zealand players who won't be missing during Origin. Penrith and Canberra have shown a well balanced squad will make you competitive. But it's easier for the likes of Bennett and Hasler to whinge to the media about their agenda, and have people lap it up. If clubs and coaches were as smart as they think they are they would figure it out, not look to the NRL to do their job for them
Al
Guest
Taylor has done a remarkable job considering how badly run our cap situation was. His best call all year was dumping the cancer from our club to reserve grade. And the results speak for themselves.. The tigers have never been so United.
Tom Rock
Expert
All completely valid points. I think this is pretty much how the thought process goes in NRL HQ. Someone comes up with a possible alternative, then a list of reasons are given for why it won't work. So not wanting to risk spoiling a good thing, they do nothing. And so it will continue, until someone formulates a suitable compromise.
Tom Rock
Expert
Fines are certainly the fastest way to eradicate this behavior. The league could go back through every game at the conclusion of the round, and identify this sort of anti social behavior. The players involved would then be issued fines for each instance identified. It might seem pretty extreme, but if someone like Ennis is dropping $5-10k a week just for acting like a goose, you can guarantee he will change his behavior.
Lovey
Guest
It's not good but comes under "gamesmanship". How do you rule on verbal niggling? But Gallen's reaction was a back slam on Friend. Did he have hands between the legs, lifting? I can't recall exactly, but I remember thinking that had that been a tackle in the run of play, rather than the assault it was, it would have been penalised. Only Gallen has retaliated in this way. IMO it deserved a couple of weeks off.
Lovey
Guest
It's not good but comes under "gamesmanship". How do you rule on verbal niggling? But Gallen's reaction was a back slam on Friend. Did he have hands between the legs, lifting? I can't recall exactly, but I remember thinking that had that been a tackle in the run of play, rather than the assault it was, it would have been penalised. Only Gallen has retaliated in this way. INMO it deserved a couple of weeks off.