The Roar
The Roar


Roar Rookie

Joined December 2018









In both cases I thought the bunker was correct. But in both cases I could have made an argument for the other side, even if I didn’t necessarily agree with it. Actually IMO in the Collins try, if Tex Hoy had a bit more experience he probably runs straight into Butcher rather than make the effort to get around him. If he were to do that I think we would hear a lot more of “thats an old fashioned shepherd, you cant just use the man playing the ball to block defenders” instead of “the man playing the ball cant just disappear”.
To me the biggest problem with the bunker is that so many of the games decisions are (for lack of a better term) 50/50 and everyone has their own opinion on what is the ‘correct’ call. As such, the bunker cant win and will be criticised no matter the outcome.
Of the four objectives accuracy, consistency, transparency and efficiency I think only efficiency is not being met. However, efficiency I believe can only truly be achieved if we accept a reduction in accuracy. I’ve read lots of calls in the comments for a shot clock to be placed on the bunker, but it will only take one obviously wrong decision because the bunker hadn’t yet reviewed that available angle and the complaint will be “weve already stopped for 30 seconds, whats 10 more seconds for the correct decision”.
I’m not a fan of the captain’s challenge but similar challenges occur in just about every sport so im willing to accept it will likely remain a part of the game. I think the Panthers losing their challenge due to insufficient evidence highlighted something that may need to be changed, but im surprised it took this long for a problem to arise from a rule that was rushed through.
Like many (in the comments section) im frustrated with non-calls on obvious forward passes. I know the technology already exists to make accurate calls on these, if this can be adapted to make real time calls I don’t see how this can be a bad thing. I don’t see how you can justify criticising this technology without seeing it’s results.

I hate the Bunker

In some way I like this idea, however, im not sure of the practicality of the ref getting the angles they want whereas the bunker has every available angle and the can choose which angle they want to analyse.

I hate the Bunker

Correct decision. Collins runs behind his player and a defender was impeded.
Nat Butcher did nothing wrong but Collins did.

'What's he meant to do?' Was Nat Butcher hard done by to be pinged for an obstruction?

I see 2 seperate issues. A youth competition as one (which I don’t really think is necessary, let the players develop in reserve grade) and a pregame game (which I agree is needed).

Season structure exposing big deficiencies in our game

At some point we see a player deliberately knock on when playing the so the 6 again becomes a penalty

The problem might be you, not six again

I do believe that to some extent players need to take more responsibility for following the rules. Playing the ball on the mark and even kicking from penalties over the mark also annoy me. But as far as holding in tackles and to some extent offside players need ‘coaching’ to know if they have breached a rule.
Ive already outlined my feelings with holding in tackles but in regards to offside, trying to time rushing out of the line to make a big hit, often requires perfect timing. Too slow you will get stepped and leave a hole, too early you will be penalised, but time it right it can be a huge play for your team.
Similarly as a retreating defender with an attacker running at you, watching play means you can not see if you’ve retreated the necessary 10m. You need that call of “youre on now”.
Likewise at marker, you believe you are square prior to the play the ball. The ball carrier moves slightly off the mark and plays the ball quickly whilst doing so. As the defender how do you know if you will be judged off side or not without the ref calling “marker not square”.
And agree that a good game is where the referee is the least noticed person on the field, not the star attraction. But for the referee to go unnoticed he needs to give the players this information. Otherwise he most definitely will become the star attraction as there will be a penalty or 6 again every second play.

The problem might be you, not six again

Great article. Like most however I have greater issues with when the 6 again is not called then when it is called.
Additionally (and I know it wasn’t the point of your article) I still don’t believe that the 6 again improves the game ‘as a spectacle’. Though it seems im probably in the minority here.

The problem might be you, not six again

“managing the game … is not the job of the referee” I couldn’t disagree with this more, I believe this is exactly the referees job. Whilst I believe this applies to every aspect of the game it is most important with the 6 different tackles outlined in the article.
As a player, I know that the referee will allow me various lengths of time to hold down in a the 6 different tackles, however I don’t know how much time he is allowing until he cause move/stand up/release whatever phrase he wants to use. Guessing could either rob me of the reward my team gets from dominating the tackle or penalise my team for holding to long.

The problem might be you, not six again

agree some clubs are happy to give one early in the count but I think the ‘reward’ to the defending team doing so isn’t so much the ref less likely to call a 2nd 6 again but rather it allows the defence to dominate the rest of the set and legally slow the play the ball down.
I also think teams tend to slow down the first tackle as you so often hear the ref say “that’s two in a row” when awarding the 6 again, they know they are given one tackle leeway to do what they like before stung with the 6 again and even if the 6 again is called it only cost them the one tackle.

The problem might be you, not six again

Can’t answer the Sailor question but playing Brittain does make me wonder if there is truth to Hunt being shopped around to other clubs.

NRL Round 18 teams: Mass changes for Bulldogs, Dragons and Knights

I’m very much not a Storm supporter and whilst I think it was slightly forward it wasnt ‘a blatant forward pass’. Can definitely understand it being let go and so marginal not even Souths fans should be outraged

Seven talking points from NRL Round 17

Juzzie is Justin O Niel

Time to remove the dead wood: Who should your NRL club let go?

no its not

It's too early to write off the Parramatta Eels

“but ultimately with this concept still utilised as a Kangaroos trial”. See I don’t see origin as being a Kangaroos trial at all, and in my opinion nor should it be. Each state coach as well as the national coach will have different plans and want different players suited to their individual plans. The most recent example is Latrell Mitchell being selected for Australia last year despite being dropped by NSW but has been occurring since Steve Roach in 89.
The duration between an origin game and an Australian test match means it wont ever be used as a trial as form and fitness changes.
If scheduling was to ever change, or your proposed NZ v England series ever came to fruition id probably lean more towards your opinion but until such a time will have to agree to disagree.

The best rugby league players don’t have to play State of Origin

in this same example what if a tier two qualifying player, we will just use Mansour for the sake of argument, does choose Australia as their tier one nation. However, chooses Lebanon as his first choice, so in World Cups or say a weekend where Lebanon and Australia both have test matches he puts Lebanon before Australia. Should this affect his origin eligibility?

The best rugby league players don’t have to play State of Origin

I agree with The Barry, if a NSW or Qld player wants to represent both NSW and their Nation of heritage I don’t see the issue, so long as they fit the eligibility of both.
I don’t see why there should be a difference for someone who has English or NZ heritage compared to someone who has Italian, Lebanese, Samoan etc heritage.

The best rugby league players don’t have to play State of Origin

If you look at the absolute skill they do recruit I would argue that they emphasise this like every other club when recruiting however the additional qualities are imbedded in them by the leadership of the senior players.

Stockholm syndrome: Time to relent to our masters, the Melbourne Storm

Yep, And the new owners (I think the Frizell’s). Things have steadily improved since they took ownership

Can Justin Holbrook be the next Trent Robinson?

I don’t think the tigers will be successful anytime soon due to the salary cap mismanagement that others have spoke of.
And I do believe that things were going backwards in his final year at Souths.
But he was a long way from ruining Souths. He left the side with a squad that not only matched most teams for talent but were battle hardened and unbelievably fit. Madge’s coaching and the team he left behind to me was a huge reason that Seibold’s rookie year was a success, even if it did require a change of coach to bring about the improved performance.

The Wests Tigers are right to move on from Benji Marshall

He will be opposing G Williams

NRL Round 17 teams: Roosters regain Keary and Sonny Bill

Agree with the point that we don’t know if there has been anything said between Smith and Storm but I think the journos would be loving the fact nothing is said. Saying nothing means they can run any story from any angle they desire for as long as it takes for a decision to be made public. Once the decision is made there are only so many great player is retiring articles that can be written.

Cameron Smith isn't on anyone's clock – he makes his own time

Disagree. The Latrell Mitchell example isn’t relevant here as he was negotiating his contract for season 2021 when Roosters basically said well if you don’t want to be here then you can leave now. Also other players contracts werent dependent on his decision at the time.
Grant and Smith may have contracts for next year but if they have get out clauses then there contracts (which reportedly they do) for next year then their contracts aren’t binding.
I do agree that it is mainly media pressure however obviously the Storm and the two players in question would like the decision as soon as possible.

Cameron Smith isn't on anyone's clock – he makes his own time

Don’t agree with all the players that are being criticised. Noticeably it seems the entire backline is being criticised. But to me it is the forwards who are struggling the most and the backline struggles are a result of this.
Luke Brooks. Do I think he has been good? Not really, but he was the dally m halfback of the year 2 years ago. I think his biggest problem is that never in his career has he played behind a decent pack. If anything taking his team to ninth so many years when behind what is probably a bottom 4 pack year on year is probably over achieving. On one hand I don’t want to see him leave but on the other I would like to see what he could do behind a strong pack. And it may take him leaving to have that chance.
Moses Mbye to me has been pretty solid. I don’t think his performances match his salary but that is more the stupidly inflated salary he was given more so than him not playing well.
Tommy Talau is not a winger. He has played mostly as a five-eight or centre all through juniors and then expected to learn the positional play, defensive reads, and pressure kick receptions of the wing in first grade. Perhaps if there was a reserve grade to develop him he could learn the skills to be a good winger there. But for mine he was always going to struggle as a first grade winger this year. I actually think he could make a great fullback but I would not entertain the thought of putting him there until he has spent the best part of a whole offseason and at least half a season playing there in reserves to learn the role.
I’m not fussed if Marshall goes around again. I wouldn’t say he is past it but he is definitely no longer a top tier half. The best case I can make for retaining him is I don’t think there is anyone better available for the money he is on. Like Brooks you can’t expect to much from him behind a beaten pack.

Reynolds has to go but as no-one will sign him so will just have to stick with him for another year. At least he seems a good club man that will help the up and coming players (if there is a reserve grade next year).
McQueen and Packer both need to go, not sure when their contracts are up.
Douehi I think is, and always will be, a rocks and diamonds player. I think they could possibly keep him as a centre but fullback is too important a position to have that type of player.
Taylor I could take or leave so long as he is not on big money. If letting him go gets the tigers a dominant front rower than by all means let him go.
I don’t understand how Garner gets the raps he does. Always seems to be dropping off tackles to me. He does run good lines but still doesn’t break the line as he isn’t a strong enough ball runner.
The young middle forwards all look to be decent talents, Mikale, Aloia, Twal, Blore, Musgrove. If any of them were blooded into an already strong pack I’ve no doubt they would excel. But, all of them combining to form a pack they’re going to struggle for another couple years yet. They’re really need a quality and experienced forward leader to show them the way in games.

Michael Maguire to take eye to Tigers' future

I’m no Leilua fan but this play hardly a brain explosion, simply doing anything he could to try to prevent the try.
If anything I think he was pretty good yesterday. Took some tough carries when the tigers forwards went missing.

Joey Leilua's latest brain explosion gifts Panthers penalty try

Rested due to playing big minutes the past month

Tedesco puts Broncos on life support