I am not sure how many Captain Calls Manly used in the game.

Two questions:

Was a Captain’s Call available for Manly to use?

Isn’t there an NRL policy that open play will be promoted by giving the attacking team the advantage in line ball decisions?

Tim
I generally agree with your thoughts.
Specifically
PETER V’LANDYS
When he took over the Trots I thought Peter was just a firefly looking for a flame to circle.
I was wrong.
He was able to bring about change in the Trots and now the Gallops.
Some areas of the game that need attention.
IMPROVE CROWDS
1. Pursue coliseum type grounds like Parramatta where the crowd are close to the action.
RL is a better game to watch in the day-time.
Consider this when scheduling especially in winter.
2. Maintain blockbuster games at night to satisfy TV needs.
3. Bring back Tina Turner promos
TECHNOLOGY
Develop a computer chip in the ball to deal with forward passes.
RULE CHANGES
1. Two coach challenges.
Especially for forward passes leading to tries.
2. Ban trainers
I would even be happy with employing St John Ambulance again.
3. Head High Tackles
When a player is injured/concussed from a stiff arm, the perpetrator should spend as much time off the field as the affected player.
Thanks Tim for your contributions.

Exactly, MLP.
However, the NRL has placed ‘trainers on the field’ (and other issues) in a very large
‘too hard basket’ for years.

It isn’t difficult to reverse ‘trainers on the field’
– a policy which has grown like topsy from the time when they were allowed onto the field to provide water in early season heatwave conditions.

A poll of fans would show it to be one of the least liked policies.
It has negative entertainment value, little functional purpose and can be iniquitous.

NRL is already a great game and I think new boss, Peter V’Landys, after his successes in the racing industries, will take the game and its entertainment value to an even better place.

I

And Keary receiving a lazy arm over the shoulder seemed to be one of the softest penalties of the year.

Dear Mr Greenberg
I wish to offer my services to the NRL as a ‘Risk Whisperer’.
It is quite obvious that previous executive(s) never assessed the risks of having a
14th member of a team on the playing field.
For example, what if:
A waterboy suffers a falcon, trips over his bottle, roles an ankle and gets concussion.
A game delay caused by:
• On field taping of the ankle
• concussion protocol
• medi van problems because of a flat battery
To assess the trainer issues, I will arrive at Head Office with a giant whiteboard.
Hopefully, all executives will participate in a ‘Brainstorm the Waterboy’ session.
On the whiteboard we will write down every conceivable way a waterboy
could possibly impact a football match.
Having an extra person on the field is like driving a car.
You know that inevitably there will be a problem, but you don’t know what kind of problem
and when the problem will occur.
Yours Sincerely
The Risk Whisperer

The Cummins ‘6 Again ‘ decision was a refereeing mistake.
However, it was INSTANTANEOUS.

The NRL Executive has had YEARS to address the ‘Trainer’ issue.
They chose to do nothing.

For the above reason I am more incensed about the ‘Waterboy’ issue
than the ‘6 Again’ issue.

The Wighton incident – the NRL can’t legislate against referee incompetence.
The Trainer incident – the NRL originally allowed trainers on the field to be
waterboys in hotter months so as to minimize player heat stress.
The NRL has the power to restrict trainers to only going on the field during play breaks.
They should do so immediately.
“Calling all members of the NRL Executive to the foyer please……………..
Calling all members of the NRL executive to the foyer please……………….
Jackpot on 32…………………..
Mr Smith your taxi has arrived…………….
Urgent call for all NRL Executive to meet in the foyer……………..”

Jack Wighton was a very deserving Clive Churchill medallist.

This year he has grown so much as a player both on and off the field.

His post match interview, expressing pleasure/pain being both the CC medallist and in a losing team – and thanking Raiders supporters for their 2019 contributions – was classy.

Well played, Jack Wighton.

Across the park, Roosters have a better squad so luck and strategy become even more important.

1 PRESSURE CRONK
If he is allowed to dance around and put in pin point kicks Raiders are in trouble.
2 PRESSURE W-HARGREAVES
Might be a hot, energy sapping night.
Force big forwards like W.-Hargreaves to move laterally.
3. NULLIFY THE TALL WINGERS
Roosters are expert at interfering with opponents going high for the ball in try scoring situations.
A dummy player will appear to go for the ball when his role is to obscure/interfere with the fullback/winger from taking a catch.
In some situations it might be best to punch the ball over the sideline.
4. NO CHEAP PENALTIES
Josh – don’t push the envelope when Roosters are in goal scoring range.
Joseph and Joseph – no retaliation
5. NO CHEAP TURNOVERS
Many activities have 3 steps to be done in order.
For chewing gum – unwrap the paper, put in mouth, chew gum
Do not – put in mouth, chew paper and then chew gum.

When playing the ball – stand up, roll the ball backwards, touch ball with the foot.
Do not – roll the ball, touch with foot then stand up etc
6. TRUST YOUR STRENGTHS
Support your mates
Offload if possible to create second phase play creating additional pressure on the opponents.
7. FINAL THOUGHT
1941 Winston Churchill was expected to give a long speech to Harrow School students on their prizegiving day.
After an hour of awards, Churchill stood up and said:
NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER GIVE UP.
He resumed his seat.

Raiders, never give up, never give up, never give up.

If Keary got off, it was a political decision.
That was a serious dangerous hit with real force.
And the swinging arm to the neck/jaw seemed pre-mediated rather than accidental.
The Review Committee penal system is supposed to be objective.
If the Committee gives a no penalty or a Grade One penalty I think the Committee
has been subjective so as to not affect the G.F.
A forceful hit to the neck area and carotid nerve etc. can affect blood flow to the brain
possibly leading to a stroke.
Many years ago a great Australian soccer player took a karate hit to the neck from a disgruntled Urugayan defender.
He never played another game of football.

The tackle was hard but fair with an arm wrap below the shoulder.

The judiciary should apologise to Papali on behalf of the refs who got it wrong.

There should be no need for Papali to appear.

Several years ago the NRL instigated a policy where any tackle which compromised the tackled player’s neck, throat or head was illegal and penalised.
Over time, this policy has been watered down.
Against the Raiders, Smith’s hand(s) and fist(s) applied pressure to the sides of the head to cause pain, discomfort and make the winger more submissive in the tackle.
This is classic wrestling technique.
Smith and others will always do what they think they can get away with.
If Smith is allowed to lay on Solomona who is laying on an opponent, he will.
Aussie Rules have it right – any contact above the shoulder is illegal.
AND THE ARL NEVER WAIVERS FROM THIS RULE.
If the NRL could get some intestinal fortitude and penalize any player who attacks or interferes with the neck, throat, head then this problem would dissipate.
Over to you NRL.

I am just reading the The Blind Side by Michael Lewis, an excellent book which at one point discusses the belief that ‘teams are only as good as the systems put into place by coaches’.
An example given is of a 1990’s American coach Bill Walsh who had a talent for taking ordinary quarterbacks and turning them into stars because of the offensive patterns he had them run.
At times, he replaced superstars like Joe Montana with someone supposedly of limited ability and had the new QB lead the competition in completions, yards gained etc.
In Australian Rules, Ron Barassi, famously was able to win a grand final by mid match changing his attack from a kicking to a passing game and forever influencing the sport.
I don’t have the answer, but I wonder which of the above coaches, or some other coach, has been the greatest innovator influencing Rugby League.

Cechin was involved in one of the worst ‘non -decisions’ of the year.
He was one of the refs in Darwin where Rapana copped a stiff arm across the nose.

Rapana left the field weakening Canberra’s attack.
Terepo’s blatant cheap shot didn’t even send him to the bin.

Rapana was a liability for the rest of the game.
Terepo played on and helped Parramatta win.

And Terry Regan being sent off in the first few minutes Country Vs City at Bruce Stadium.

Trying to objectify decision making with a rigid set of rules based on grades and numbers
(was that indiscretion a 2, 3 or 2.86 repeater?) has its limits.

To illustrate, I remember a selection panel I was on for a prestigious part-time job.
To be objective, I gave candidates a score out of 10 for seven different criteria.
The best candidate I scored 67/70 – a shoe in.
He even had a reference from the GG!
I would have given him the job.

The chairperson identified to me why he was unsuitable.
The chairperson was right.

Sometimes, trying to be too objective clouds sensible decision-making.

Information from 1,2,3 grading, video equipment, height and angle of impact etc need to be considered by panels.
However, their professional judgement is still the critical ingredient in decisions made.

The Bulldogs game showed that Dean Pay is one of the best NRL coaches – if not the best.
Referees were told at the start of the year to ‘put their whistles away’ and Pay, with a relatively weak squad, has organized his side to slow the opponents when defending.

And the tactic against Penrith was very effective.
Only 2 points scored by Penrith when receiving penalties close to the line.

In front of goal, Tolman went to sleep on the Penrith player and had to be woken up.
It should have been a sin bin.
However, who wants to spoil a game involving potential wooden spooners?

Tolman would later commit an arm grab so blatant referees were forced to take action.

With the Tolman send off, Penrith dithered about whether to take a shot at goal or line kick.
There was no sense of urgency from the players or bench.
3 minutes of Tolman’s bin time was wasted while Cleary waited for his kicking instrument.

On the night, Pay’s coaching strategies were very successful.
– Concede a penalty rather than risk a try.
– Bandage a head cut on the field and waste a few minutes.
– Hide the kicking T and bewilder Nathan.

R.L. was improved when we got rid of unlimited tackles.
The game can be further improved by changing the ‘knock on’ rule to a ‘dropped ball’ rule.

And more improved when the video ref is asked to adjudicate on a pass(es) in the scoring of a try.

Oh, and was that a short forward pass by Hodgson that resulted in a try last night?

I would be interested to see Foxtel viewer stats on Thursday night compared to matches played Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

My guess is that Thursday night numbers would hold up fairly well.

A radical thought.
The best ground which also has 4 million people within 80km is Gosford.
Why not have a game at Gosford every fortnight?
The alternate week take the game to the bush – Eric Weissel Oval etc.

The forward pass issue is more of an administrative problem than a referee linesperson problem.

Why can’t Head Office allow a referee to say:
‘Check the touchline, check the grounding AND check the pass was not forward.’

The linesman trailing 5 metres behind the play, with the Warriors players running away from him was in no position to determine whether a forward pass was thrown.

The referee had a better position to make the call.

The video ref with slow motion and freeze frame was the best person to make the call.

So, the referee (who is in position)

defers to the call of the linesman (who is running 4 yards behind the winger).

Either:

charge the referee for being drunk in charge of a whistle

Or:

sack him for incompetence.

Note:
When the pass was made the linesman was 4 or 5 metres behind the play.

He could not have made his forward pass call with any certainty.

The linesman made a guess to decide who won the game.

Pathetic.

Get rid of clangers by touchies in try scoring situations by allowing a video review.
If a touch judge says forward pass then the video ref would have to see evidence to the contrary.
Too many games/competition points have been decided by contentious forward pass calls.
Alternatively, give captains 2 challenges during the game over contentious rulings.

Thanks for the article which illuminates how far the role of lock forward has changed
over the years.

Going back as far as the 50’s, a lock’s main role was cover tackling in defence.
A lock was the second line of defence with the fullback.

The best cover defender was probably Johnny Raper who had a copybook tackle style
around the buttocks.

I thought the best attacking lock of the last 50 years is South’s Ron Coote
– very damaging around the edge of the rucks.

Coote was fast, long legged and difficult to stop, a bit like a Brett Mullins.
His running style reminds me of a Gridiron running back skirting the rucks.

How the game, and the role of playing positions, evolves is up to the administrators.
Certainly, the decisions in recent years have taken the game closer to American Football.
Hopefully, the number interchanges etc will be reassessed to increase stamina as a desirable attribute and reduce the number of behemoths currently playing.

If this happens Brandon Smith, who you regard as ‘small’at 90 kg, may be regarded as ‘normal’.

Two points.

1. The judiciary needs to consider the level of pre-meditation.
In the Terepo and Fifita incidents there was a calculated intent to do maximum damage to an opponent not in possession of the ball.

Both players were deserving of greater penalties than they received.

For the Kikau incident, there was a fraction of a second between Kikau setting himself for the tackle and contact with the other player.
I don’t believe Kikau showed any intent to illegally hurt the smaller opponent.

2. Sometimes, setting up rigid guidelines and points systems to be more ‘objective’, more ‘scientific’, only serves to obfuscate what a fair ruling would be.