Penalties.

[Kingsgrove-Loiner]

Hi guys, we haven't had one of these for a while, so I thought it's time for a penalty debate.

I've been keeping tabs of the penalty counts for the season, and as usual, they show the same old story.

There are 13 clubs that have received over 100 penalties this season, and 3 that haven't. Those 3 are Broncos (95), Eels (93) and of course, the Roosters with a measly 88. The club that's received the most is of course, souffs with 136. This is 10 more than the next highest, the Titans.

On penalties conceded, we're not last on this list surprisingly. That honour goes to the Titans who have conceded 137. Next worst is Wests with 132 and we're 3rd, having conceded 127.

On penalty differentials, we're miles in front with a massive -39. Next worst are the Eels with -21 and then wests on -12. The team with the best differential is the Raiders with a massive +31. Yeah, I thought that was worth putting in bold. Second is souffs with 17 and then Manly with 14

On penalty counts won, Eels are the worst - they've only won 2 counts all season. Bulldogs and Roosters are next worst, having only won 4 counts all season. Best performers in this category are the Raiders (won 12 counts) souffs (won 11) and Knights (won 10). Just on this, souffs haven't lost a count at home all season. They've won 7 and drawn 1.

Now here's one for the conspiracy theorists. Ms Loiner works for a major government run organisation, and has just got a new boss. He used to be the CFO at news ltd. He had a fair bit to do with Super League, before becoming Rupie's right hand man, and then the Chairman of Melbourne Storm after the salary cap scandal. (shouldn't be hard to google his name).

When she told him that I was mad keen footy supporter, he asked her who I supported. When she told him, his first words were, and I quote , 'yeah, well, I absolutely hate the Roosters'. This is from a bloke who was as high as it's possible to get in a company that ran the game for 14 years.

Makes you wonder, hey?

[Arties Pie]

We don't help ourselves with all those silly ruck penalties, Maloney seems to give plenty of those away and Jared is always good for a few.

[Kingsgrove-Loiner]

We don't help ourselves with all those silly ruck penalties, Maloney seems to give plenty of those away and Jared is always good for a few.

I'm not saying we don't have a few habitual offenders in the team AP, but that's only half the story isn't it? The habitual offenders in the opposition always seem to be squeaky clean when they play us. Why else would we so far behind with penalties received?

[Arties Pie]

oh don't get me wrong I agree with you that we nearly always get the shaft and that teams that are as bad as us at giving the silly penalties turn into angels when we play them.

[davos]

We don't help ourselves with all those silly ruck penalties, Maloney seems to give plenty of those away and Jared is always good for a few.

The ones which went against us last week were pure BS.

The riff players were staying twice as long in the ruck and making no effort to move out of the play the ball area. How many times did jake have to jump over the player who was interfering in the play the ball area.....

[stsae]

We have to control what we can control, that's not penalties received. It's often not even penalties given away, although we do have more control there, sometimes.

We certainly can't control how outsiders consider us. In fact there are stats, like 6 GFs in 14 seasons, to suggest that the "hate" isn't such a bad thing.

What we can control and what we haven't seen enough of this year is controlling the football. Minimising unforced errors.

85% completions against The Riff, who I believe were slightly better, something like 88%.

We hold the pill we are almost impossible to beat.

I believe we have that much strike, weapons everywhere, that unlike some sides holding the pill doesn't mean boring no risk footy. It just means we are on.

I think Gasnier says it best, the only side who can beat us are us.

[Tommy Smith]

I do like the new rule they've introduced this year, which states:

"any lost ball by Sam or George Burgess will automatically result in a penalty for a presumed stripping offence, no ifs or buts."

Souffs play such a dull brand of footy and when the penalties dry up in the biggest games they will struggle. Perhaps Madge knows this given he dumped Reynolds for Keary with 20 to go on the weekend.

[The Axe]

I'll buy into this again.

1. Thank God Trent said what he said post Manly match or it would have been much worse, I believe. See sig below.

2. Someone posted that Easts have the fastest play the balls in the comp (can anyone find a source to confirm this stat). If so, would it not naturally flow that a team that tries to get to feet for a fast play the ball would receive more penalties in the ruck as opposing Ds try to prevent them from doing so? Not so, we are last in penalties received. Please make sense of this.

[player 1]

I'll buy into this again.

1. Thank God Trent said what he said post Manly match or it would have been much worse, I believe. See sig below.

2. Someone posted that Easts have the fastest play the balls in the comp (can anyone find a source to confirm this stat). If so, would it not naturally flow that a team that tries to get to feet for a fast play the ball would receive more penalties in the ruck as opposing Ds try to prevent them from doing so? Not so, we are 3rd last in penalties received. Please make sense of this.

Make that LAST in penalties received Axe.

[The Axe]

Make that LAST in penalties received Axe.

Done!

[stsae]

I'll buy into this again.

1. Thank God Trent said what he said post Manly match or it would have been much worse, I believe. See sig below.

2. Someone posted that Easts have the fastest play the balls in the comp (can anyone find a source to confirm this stat). If so, would it not naturally flow that a team that tries to get to feet for a fast play the ball would receive more penalties in the ruck as opposing Ds try to prevent them from doing so? Not so, we are last in penalties received. Please make sense of this.

The answer is a pineapple my friend.

We all acknowledge it happens on a weekly basis to us. You are correct as have been everyone who has floated such theories.

If there was a solution I'm 100% positive knowing our club, we would have solved it by now.

It's obvious that we have no chance of controlling the situation around penalties.

I'm of the opinion we stick to what we can control.

Be as disciplined as possible and hold the farking ball.

Therefore we give as little as possible.

What we receive or don't receive then has as little negative effect as possible.

A pineapple.

[player 1]

The answer is a pineapple my friend.

We all acknowledge it happens on a weekly basis to us. You are correct as have been everyone who has floated such theories.

If there was a solution I'm 100% positive knowing our club, we would have solved it by now.

It's obvious that we have no chance of controlling the situation around penalties.

I'm of the opinion we stick to what we can control.

Be as disciplined as possible and hold the farking ball.

Therefore we give as little as possible.

What we receive or don't receive then has as little negative effect as possible.

A pineapple.

Agree with all you've said.

Coach Robinson is a true professional. He knows just as well as anyone how artificially handicapped by penalties Easts are. Only once, in the presser after the first Manly game, did he let this slip publicly.

He is a pragmatist. He realizes his job is to give Easts the best possible chance at back to back premierships, not to have the personal satisfaction of giving the NRL an embarrassing serve about shafting us. He knows at best this will be fruitless and more likely worsen it. Hell, there are people on this forum who reliably and repeatedly heap vitriol and ridicule on anyone who dares to even highlight facts that glaringly point to the possibility Easts are unofficially handicapped. Why would the referees' boss or NRL lend a sympathetic ear?

[Johnny Tobin]

As Robbo always says, it's not the penalty that is the problem - it's how you react.

I remain amazed at what we achieved last season.

[stsae]

Agree with all you've said.

Coach Robinson is a true professional. He knows just as well as anyone how artificially handicapped by penalties Easts are. Only once, in the presser after the first Manly game, did he let this slip publicly.

He is a pragmatist. He realizes his job is to give Easts the best possible chance at back to back premierships, not to have the personal satisfaction of giving the NRL an embarrassing serve about shafting us. He knows at best this will be fruitless and more likely worsen it. Hell, there are people on this forum who reliably and repeatedly heap vitriol and ridicule on anyone who dares to even highlight facts that glaringly point to the possibility Easts are unofficially handicapped. Why would the referees' boss or NRL lend a sympathetic ear?

A wise man once said to me, after watching footy for over 40 years I'm yet to see a reff or official reverse a decision.

I like how as a team/club we just move on when we cop a howler.

It's best IMO to use the us against them idea, even in on field motivation between bad calls.

Wasting breath on eggs who aren't gonna admit anything.

[Guest]

The answer is a pineapple my friend.

We all acknowledge it happens on a weekly basis to us. You are correct as have been everyone who has floated such theories.

If there was a solution I'm 100% positive knowing our club, we would have solved it by now.

It's obvious that we have no chance of controlling the situation around penalties.

I'm of the opinion we stick to what we can control.

Be as disciplined as possible and hold the farking ball.

Therefore we give as little as possible.

What we receive or don't receive then has as little negative effect as possible.

A pineapple.

If we can improve on this, it will help to highlight the stinking bias against this club.