Bunker - Fraud watch

[Mickie Lane]

Don’t torture yourselfs.
My mate that follows Manly reckons Manly get no favours from the refs or the bunker.
My mate has hat follows Souths reckons Souths get no favours from the refs or the bunker.
My mate that follows the Tigers reckons the Tigers get no favours from the refs or the bunker.

[Carlos Parra]

Don’t torture yourselfs.
My mate that follows Manly reckons Manly get no favours from the refs or the bunker.
My mate has hat follows Souths reckons Souths get no favours from the refs or the bunker.
My mate that follows the Tigers reckons the Tigers get no favours from the refs or the bunker.

So, your mates and mates of mates would vote overwhelmingly to get rid of the bunker and find some workable solutions to the dire ref situation?

[Mickie Lane]

So, your mates and mates of mates would vote overwhelmingly to get rid of the bunker and find some workable solutions to the dire ref situation?

The game is so over scrutinised by the media which in turn has the fans over scrutinising it.
There has always been dud calls by the officials & now the bunker but we are talking about humans here & humans make mistakes.
If everyone could get perfection out of their heads the game would be alot better off.

[SupermanSupportsEasts4Eva]

The game is so over scrutinised by the media, which in turn has the fans over scrutinising it.
There has always been dud calls by the officials & now the bunker but we are talking about humans here & humans make mistakes.
If everyone could get perfection out of their heads the game would be alot better off.

Mate, I agree with the media involvement. I think that the issue most people have is not with the on field decisions made in a split second, but rather with the bunker involvement. The bunker has the time to review the on field calls but still manage to come to inconsistent decisions. Case in point, the ruling of the obstructions during the Riff game. Or this new distributior rule. The bunker is supposed to remove the inconsistency that is made from on field decisions made by humans on the go. It seems to be a lottery at times as to which way the officials go.

[Rooster_6]

seems like maybe this should be a sticky.
sloan charged by the match review committee for kicking walker but we don't get a penalty. not so much v the bunker but don't know how the touchie missed it

If I was to be critical of the bunker it’s that I thought Keary’s try should’ve been an 8 point try, the way Sloan comes in with his knees was beyond careless.

Problem with the NRL is they punish based on the injury sustained front the act, not the merits of the act itself. Had Keary or Walker been knocked out from either of Sloan’s acts he’s looking at weeks on the sideline.

Taane Milne’s actions in the dying seconds of the game had serious malicious intent, but he’s only getting 2 weeks. It’s one of the biggest dog acts I’ve seen in the game in a long time…

[Kelby]

I would just put Gus Gould in the bunker every game.

[zac]

On Sloane he copped 2 charges in the same game - why is the second one a 1st offence and not a 2nd offence which is a $1800 to $2500 fine

Tyrell Sloan (Dragons)	Grade 1 Dangerous Contact	1st Offence	TBC	$1000-$1500 fine
Tyrell Sloan (Dragons)	Grade 1 Dangerous Contact	1st Offence	TBC	$1000-$1500 fine

k s is a thinker and he raises a good point here. i guess it comes down to the fact that he committed that second offence without having yet been charged by the mrc of a first offence

[zac]

If I was to be critical of the bunker it’s that I thought Keary’s try should’ve been an 8 point try, the way Sloan comes in with his knees was beyond careless.

Problem with the NRL is they punish based on the injury sustained front the act, not the merits of the act itself. Had Keary or Walker been knocked out from either of Sloan’s acts he’s looking at weeks on the sideline.

Taane Milne’s actions in the dying seconds of the game had serious malicious intent, but he’s only getting 2 weeks. It’s one of the biggest dog acts I’ve seen in the game in a long time…

yeah, although to be fair i didn't pick that one up on the day.
speaking of matters judicial - i reckon the nrl should make some allowance for players being sent off or spending time in the bin. a player sent off in the last minute of the game for a reckless head high tackle will be given the same suspension as a player sent off in the first minute - or in dom young's case in the first half. it doesn't make sense given that playing with 12 men for more than half a game is worse than playing with 13 men but being unable to select a suspended winger for a couple of games

[zac]

Don’t torture yourselfs.
My mate that follows Manly reckons Manly get no favours from the refs or the bunker.
My mate has hat follows Souths reckons Souths get no favours from the refs or the bunker.
My mate that follows the Tigers reckons the Tigers get no favours from the refs or the bunker.

fair call but it doesn't hurt for us - or more importantly for robbo - to call out bad reffing and bunker decisions. the squeaky wheel get the oil

[Juggler]

Well the Tigers had a shocker against them on the Korisau no-try. They aren’t biased. Just incompetent.

[Ron Burgundy]

Well the Tigers had a shocker against them on the Korisau no-try. They aren’t biased. Just incompetent.

That decision exemplified what is wrong with the bunker. They over scrutinise stuff to justify their existence and come up with some bizarre decisions instead of just using common sense and awarding what was an obvious try.

[Recky62]

This could become a very long list. Can we make it a sticky?

Maybe Rooster_6 could also highlight the diabolical decisions that Annesley is forced to admit were wrong.

Highlight fkn Annersleys apologies!….no one has that much time on their hands

[Jacks Fur Coat]

That decision exemplified what is wrong with the bunker. They over scrutinise stuff to justify their existence and come up with some bizarre decisions instead of just using common sense and awarding what was an obvious try.

I've had an idea. Reduce the influence of the bunker, and put more onus on the refs decisions.

Each team captain has 2 challenges. One 'try' challenge and one general play challenge. The bunker only gets involved on captains challenges. The try challenge can be used either for a try awarded against your team, or a try disallowed for your team. If successful you keep or lose further challenges depending on the outcome, same as now.

It will mean some refs calls will be wrong and get through, but you have more continuity and decisions made in the moment in real motion, not slo-mo nitpicking. Bit like the old days with a caps challenge safeguard.

It's more pressure on the ref, but now they are lazy and sloppy with the over policing from the bunker.

[Vasco]

Don’t torture yourselfs.
My mate that follows Manly reckons Manly get no favours from the refs or the bunker.
My mate has hat follows Souths reckons Souths get no favours from the refs or the bunker.
My mate that follows the Tigers reckons the Tigers get no favours from the refs or the bunker.

If you saw the penalties differential over the past 20 years you might change your mind.

[JAF]

I've had an idea. Reduce the influence of the bunker, and put more onus on the refs decisions.

Each team captain has 2 challenges. One 'try' challenge and one general play challenge. The bunker only gets involved on captains challenges. The try challenge can be used either for a try awarded against your team, or a try disallowed for your team. If successful you keep or lose further challenges depending on the outcome, same as now.

It will mean some refs calls will be wrong and get through, but you have more continuity and decisions made in the moment in real motion, not slo-mo nitpicking. Bit like the old days with a caps challenge safeguard.

It's more pressure on the ref, but now they are lazy and sloppy with the over policing from the bunker.

What a great suggestion JFC!
Maybe send it to Buzz and the NRL so it can be further discussed, and hopefully implemented??