Steve Chiddy (bunker official from last night) stood down

[stringaz]

"Hey Steve? Thanks for getting us the desired result last night"

"Yeah nah yeah all good"

"listen mate, we've copped a bit of heat from the incident, we actually forgot in this day and age that there are camera's everywhere. So um, could you do us a teensy weensy favour and just **** off up the coast fishing for a couple of days?"

"ooh what?!"

"yeah nah yeah, its just under the proviso of having to stand you down , but we'll see you back here on monday for a debrief? Its just that the roosters play the cows next week and we're reaaaallllly gonna need you for that one"

"oh yeah nah sweet"

"oh and steve? Try not to trip over that boat in your driveway when you collect the paper mate, we're not in the business of seeing people get seriously hurt in order to further our agenda mate ok? Sweet"

[stringaz]

So thats actually 4pts in question now after the rigging that went on when we played the strom and now eels. Keep an eye on the games we play when it comes to settling the top four.

[Blue Suede Schubert]

So thats actually 4pts in question now after the rigging that went on when we played the strom and now eels. Keep an eye on the games we play when it comes to settling the top four.

Yes, somebody certainly didn't was us to move into the top 4 last night. Hmmm I wonder who that may be?

[Juggler]

Teddy: "Cecchin said at half-time that he didn’t see that and that he only saw my one."

So we can add liar to the description of Cecchin given he clearly asked bunker to check what happens after the grounding. Shows his character, lying to save his own ass.

Well, no you can't. You just said that Teddy said that Checcin only saw the Teddy incident. He asked the Bunker to review grounding & after. Therefore it's the Bunker's fault.

[TheLoneRooster]

Yes, somebody certainly didn't was us to move into the top 4 last night.

I can't think of another reason that makes sense because I don't think it was incompetence.

[Big Dog]

Expect zero favours from the bunker for the rest of 2021.

[rented tracksuit]

Someone give that c@#t covid.

[barryd]

Well, no you can't. You just said that Teddy said that Checcin only saw the Teddy incident. He asked the Bunker to review grounding & after. Therefore it's the Bunker's fault.

So while the bunker was checking the Teddy incident,everyone at the ground was watching the knees into Hutchos back on the big screen. Are you suggesting Checcin did not even look at the screen? They played it 10 times. And when the Bunker said high shot on Teddy, Checcin could have asked if they noticed the knees that they were showing on the big screen.

[Blue Suede Schubert]

I can't think of another reason that makes sense because I don't think it was incompetence.

I don't think it was incompetence either.

[King Salvo]

more heads could roll- ref and touchies next

https://wwos.nine.com.au/nrl/news-20...d-ab2f7c2723fa

[Grant Hedger]

So here’s some stats that show the bias against us. In first 9 games, in aggregate, 60% of ruck infringements were called against the Roosters, and 59% of penalties were called against the Roosters. Only in 1 game out of 9 were ruck infringements plus penalties in Roosters favour. 2 were even, and 6 were against. Last night the ruck infringements plus penalties were closer to 70% against the Roosters. And this is in a game where 2 Eels players were cited for foul play, yet stats suggest were infringed more. Joke. PVL, this is on you and your inept, biased refs.

[zac]

it would make more sense if it came out that chiddy was busting to go to the toilet and cos it was close to half time left the cleaner in charge

[Tommy Smith]

So here’s some stats that show the bias against us. In first 9 games, in aggregate, 60% of ruck infringements were called against the Roosters, and 59% of penalties were called against the Roosters. Only in 1 game out of 9 were ruck infringements plus penalties in Roosters favour. 2 were even, and 6 were against. Last night the ruck infringements plus penalties were closer to 70% against the Roosters. And this is in a game where 2 Eels players were cited for foul play, yet stats suggest were infringed more. Joke. PVL, this is on you and your inept, biased refs.

It's been the same story every year for over a decade.

The ONLY explanation for such an anomaly - for such consistently lopsided penalty counts against us - is bias.

Never forget 2014 where the Bunnies received ONE HUNDRED MORE PENALTIES THAN US.

For anyone who understands stats, this clear bias is obvious.

But, but conspiracy! Tin foil hatttt!

[Jacks Fur Coat]

Someone give that c@#t covid.

A mild cough and a slight temp...cop that Chiddy!

[ism22]

"Hey Steve? Thanks for getting us the desired result last night"

"Yeah nah yeah all good"

"listen mate, we've copped a bit of heat from the incident, we actually forgot in this day and age that there are camera's everywhere. So um, could you do us a teensy weensy favour and just **** off up the coast fishing for a couple of days?"

"ooh what?!"

"yeah nah yeah, its just under the proviso of having to stand you down , but we'll see you back here on monday for a debrief? Its just that the roosters play the cows next week and we're reaaaallllly gonna need you for that one"

"oh yeah nah sweet"

"oh and steve? Try not to trip over that boat in your driveway when you collect the paper mate, we're not in the business of seeing people get seriously hurt in order to further our agenda mate ok? Sweet"

Pretty much. I dunno what being 'stood down' means when you're not set to lose any pay or status and you'll be back the next week.

Again... I think the issue is that nobody can replace him. They don't have a list of reserve-grade refs who they can promote. Also (from a practical perspective), they probably can't terminate his contract just because he stuffed up one game. People make mistakes and move on in all professions.

Not siding with him but I didn't see the incident live (was putting my kid to bed so only saw the second half). Injury aside, all I saw was:
- An idiot committing to the tackle, missing and then falling over Hutcho. I get why they mighta been hesitant to call a penalty, but IMO it was 100% an 'on report' kinda thing.
- Teddy copping a coat-hanger while passing the ball (late and malicious... so me that's a sens-off, I'm sick of seeing Teddy getting that treatment and people getting away with it!!! It's a disgrace given his profile in the game).
- Incompetence from the refs/bunker because 'ON REPORT' means just that... 'can you please check this one for us?!?' They shoulda made the

A broader issue I see is that our attack is top notch and tricks everybody. Thus, clobbering us late/high is okay because 'whoops I missed the tackle, that was an accident!!!' Whereas the Eels et al are more... 6 again... 6 again... 6 again... 6 again... FINALLY some bozo crashes over for a 100% gratuitous, slow, lumbering try. Oh and if our forwards tackles the guy and he flops down in a way that his chin taps SST/JWH/Radley's forearm (or they simply get hurt by a big hit) then STAIGHT AWAY... 'PEEEEP... PENALTY... ON REPORT!!! IN THE BIN FOR 10 AS WELL!!!' IMO there's a double standard that comes about because they get dominated more easily (so flop down & get hurt in tackles) and we do more high-speed tricks, so dog shots are 'okay'. IMO it should be the opposite... show some respect when you're up against guys like Teddy or you WILL be in trouble. No dog shots please as his salary's worth 10 of you...