The NRL knew the risks for years about on-field trainers and did nothing

By Tim Gore / Expert

Heads have got to roll.

There are few things worse in the sporting pantheon than seeing a totally avoidable situation impact upon a game negatively, especially one that has been warned against for years.

But that’s what happened when the Roosters orange shirt trainer interfered with the play during the 2019 grand final. The referees’ decision to award the scrum to the Roosters was technically correct – but morally wrong.

The blame lies squarely with NRL Operations and their complicity for years in letting the trainers flaunt the rules of the game.

Two sets after a person who shouldn’t have been allowed on the field interfered with the play – albeit not intentionally – the Chooks scored a vital try. In a match won by six points, it was a pivotal moment.

When Sia Soliola charged down the Luke Keary kick, it rebounded directly into the Roosters trainer who was – for some unknown reason – on the field.

This wasn’t a bizarre isolated incident.

This was an accident that had been waiting to happen for years.

They have been warned for years of the risk that a sudden change in possession could see a trainer get caught up in the play.

Yet the NRL Operations Manager – Nathan McGuirk – has been allowing the team trainers to blatantly operate in contravention of the NRL’s own rules that are detailed in their Operations Manual.

Here is the key area of the NRL’s Manual that has only been vaguely enforced since at least the 2015 season:

“In all cases when trainers enter the field of play to either; attend to an injured player, carry water, or deliver individual messages, they must immediately leave the field once their assigned task has been completed and return to the player’s bench.”

Yeah…

That isn’t even sort of what happens.

They are always on the field.

The NRL’s guidelines clearly state that their presence on the field cannot in any way constitute a disadvantage to the opposing team either.

So while the referees’ decision to award the scrum to the Roosters could be argued to be correct – although there is a counter-argument that the charge down changed the attacking team to be the Raiders – there is no question that morally the ball should have gone to the Raiders.

In the AFL if the ball touches a runner it is a free kick and a 50-metre penalty to the opposition team. That really incentivises them to stay the hell away from the play.

In the NRL the orange trainers can’t carry any messages at all. Their role is to attend to injured players, provide water (only when their team is in possession), and they can also be involved in the on-field interchange process.

Joseph Leilua of the Raiders lays on the field (Photo by Mark Metcalfe/Getty Images)

So what exactly was the Roosters trainer doing directly behind the line in just the third minute of the grand final?

There was no one injured, and as it was the very start of the match there were no interchanges to be made, nor did anyone require water.

Yet there the Roosters orange shirt trainer was. On the field. And in the way.

He was being allowed to be there and when he got in the way of an opposition attacking chance it was his side that directly benefited.

Rather than Elliott Whitehead having the opportunity to scoop up the ball and try to make the try line, the Roosters got the scrum and, two consecutive sets later, scored a vital try instead.

It was a crucial incident and a completely avoidable one. McGuirk’s job is to make sure the games are run in line with the rules set out in the Operations Manual. This incident is a complete failure on his part.

The NRL will fine the hell out of a coach for not speaking at a press conference – another rule in their operations manual – but the orange and blue shirt trainers are constantly on the field, which poses an actual risk to the gameplay. Their priorities are massively out of whack to say the least.

Ricky Stuart (AAP Image/Dave Hunt)

You might not think trainers on the field is a big deal. However, with it comes dangers. Dangers McGuirk has positively been informed of, and should understand.

Firstly, it allows on-field coaching, which blatantly occurs every game but is forbidden.

Secondly, it poses the risk of the trainers illegally getting involved with the match, as Alan Langer did in Round 4, 2016.

Further, Kurt Wrigley did it in Round 16, 2016 when the then Rabbitohs assistant coach and blue shirt trainer, violently reefed the ball out from under a possibly injured Tyrone Peachey.

While Wrigley was suspended for a week, nothing occurred to Langer.

Thirdly, it poses the risk that the trainers will get in the way of the play – just as the Roosters trainer did in the biggest match of 2019.

In the 2016 grand final, Cronulla Sharks blue shirt trainer Steve Price was illegally on the field in the last moments of the grand final. He had been yelling out instructions to the Shark’s defenders from the sideline.

However, he was actually on the field of play during the crucial last moments, and it was widely contended that the Storm’s Ben Hampton may have confused Price for a Sharks defender and chosen not to pass to the actually completely unmarked Chase Blair as a result.

McGuirk has been warned repeatedly about these risks for years. And yet Todd Greenberg now has a massive headache on the very topic.

How McGuirk will try to explain it away is anyone’s guess. Fortunately, Ben Cummins’ almighty six-again blunder has taken some of the blowtorch off his belly.

It’s s good bet that there will be blamestorming happening right now at NRL HQ in Moore Park.

McGuirk should be praying that his scalp isn’t the one his superiors find to be the most convenient to throw to the baying mob.

I see no reason why it shouldn’t be though.

In spite of being repeatedly warned about the risks of non-enforcement, he’s continually failed to enforce the rules in regards to trainers on the field.

And now that’s caused a major issue in a grand final – and it was totally avoidable.

It’s well overdue for Greenberg to call him to account.

The Crowd Says:

2019-10-11T01:30:03+00:00

Nick

Roar Guru


Granted... but it hit the head of the trainer in the Raiders attacking half. Raiders were technically in controlled possession of the ball. There's little evidence coming forward to suggest that the Roosters deserved the ball back, particularly on the 5th tackle kick.

AUTHOR

2019-10-11T00:39:23+00:00

Tim Gore

Expert


I think it is more about what half of the field it happens in.

2019-10-09T09:56:34+00:00

Tah-Man

Roar Pro


I think it’s clear you don’t have a real question Peter. You just want to rant and deflect any responsibility for the Raiders loss on then

2019-10-09T09:40:30+00:00

Tim Buck 3

Roar Rookie


No I haven't seen any other player head the ball in a charge down. The ball hitting his head shows he was nowhere near taking out his legs. I accept that you thought the ref should've penalised Soliola but I thought he was running away from the kicker after the charge down.

2019-10-09T08:01:07+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


Peter Davies, “Trainer stopped a Canberra try”. Now you’re Nostradamus, are you? Certain try? Not possible, or potential, but certain try? How far out was the kick taken? 30m from Canberra line, so 70m back to Sydney line. You didn’t notice Tedesco coming across in cover, who is much faster than Whitehead? You can try to change history, but the facts remain, the best team won, no matter how many different ways you try to re-invent the could’ves, would’ves & should’ves.

2019-10-09T06:32:10+00:00

Tim Buck 3

Roar Rookie


I don't know what you're on about with that bizarre reply but the trainer stopped a Canberra try and Easts were rewarded with the scrum feed. This was the match defining incident and the team that benefitted from that was Easts. They didn't win because of some perceived superiority but because the Easts trainer stopped a Canberra try and the stupid rules gave Easts the scrum feed.

2019-10-09T03:49:09+00:00

slippinjimmy

Roar Rookie


Nonsense. First of all, a referee was standing no less than 5 meters away from the contact and was watching the play the entire time. Neither referee called the tackle dangerous, or even suspected the tackle to be dangerous given that they didn't ask for the video ref to take a look before making a decision on the incident with the trainer - as they are entitled to do during a stoppage when they suspect foul play has occurred. Second, the Soliola wasn't cited by the Match Review Committee, meaning they found nothing wrong with the contact either.

2019-10-09T03:35:58+00:00

P Air

Guest


Any rule that gets Alan Langer's ugly mug off the field will be supported by me.

AUTHOR

2019-10-08T23:31:39+00:00

Tim Gore

Expert


All good Mushi. As you know, I've made mistakes myself.

2019-10-08T21:15:22+00:00

mushi

Roar Guru


Apologies Tim, I shouldn't have over weighted that one comment versus the broader intent of the article. I thought you took the low road but instead I just jumped on the subway!

2019-10-08T19:17:23+00:00

Chris Love

Roar Guru


I just had to go back to watch it again because I thought I missed something. Not a shoulder charge at all. Not spearing in at the legs, it was a standard RL tackle which he was entitled to make. Keary rushed a kick at the last second because he was standing far too shallow. Any dangerous contact in that contact was not on Soliola.

2019-10-08T10:46:31+00:00

Pickett

Guest


@Peter Davies It doesnt' matter what I think about the rules - they are the rules at the moment. The refs were correct to give Easts the feed. If you don't like the rules or if you think they are stupid and need to change, then contact Graham Annesley. In relation to trainers on the field, 99.99% of league supporters hate it. The 0.1% being Alfie Langer. But that's another topic for discussion. I hope this incident prompts the powers that be to ensure the trainers are only on during break of play to administer the magic sponge and then P.O.Q from the field. BTW, did you know the Canberra trainer was on the field in the previous set when they had the ball? A blight on the game and a farce.

2019-10-08T09:24:48+00:00

Simmo

Roar Rookie


Pretty sure V'lanys is a lifelong mate of Politis? Expect more of the same

2019-10-08T09:22:48+00:00

Simmo

Roar Rookie


Send some my way, all the ones I have the joy of interacting with have turned into dopes. Or they were already dopes, and I failed to notice....

2019-10-08T08:03:05+00:00

sheek

Roar Guru


Peter Davies - And 'if' you keep your head while everyone else in the room is losing theirs, you'll be the tallest person in the room. Would've, could've, should've.....meh..........

2019-10-08T07:43:28+00:00

Big Mig

Roar Rookie


NRL needs to boot Greenberg out and his sidekick Annesley. Give refs more authority and let them live and die by it. Eg Cummins and G Sutton not to referee next year’s GF.

2019-10-08T07:01:26+00:00

Tim Buck 3

Roar Rookie


So you don't think it's a stupid rule because Easts gained an advantage from it. If you can imagine not being an Easts fan for a while you would have to say that it is a stupid rule and makes the game look stupid. Who made up this stupid rule? Trainers will be used by coaches to run in front of their kickers to get another 6 tackles. It should be like the AFL where runners getting in the way give the opposition a free kick so his team is penalised not rewarded as is the case in the NRL.

2019-10-08T06:36:45+00:00

Pickett

Guest


@ Peter Davis If what you say is fair dinkum, then all the best and blessings to you mate. There are some things much more important than footy, even GF wins. That said, the refs got the call right under the rules as it is. The fact that it was a triple falcon caught the average fans by surprise. But the refs were right. Getting the trainers off is another issue and I hope this is a catalyst for it.

2019-10-08T05:58:24+00:00

Tim Buck 3

Roar Rookie


Had the trainer not been there and the Raider scores a try then they would've been the better team and won as they almost always usually do.

2019-10-08T04:56:33+00:00

My Little Pony

Roar Rookie


No one is disputing the fact that the ball hit Soliola in the head. However, that is not taken into consideration in these types of incidents. I'll ask the question again, have you not seen similar incidents penalised this year? I've seen several.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar