NRL Grand Final.

[Dave T]

35 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

To be honest with you, I am OK with this.

I love to see the commentary team to just get on with the game and not forensically go back to previous plays to find fault with a play or the referee's decision.

Yeah, I understand that, and I know sometimes we criticise Sky obsessing over things that have happened previously, but it jars when things are literally ignored on the TV broadcast. 

[Mr Frisky]

I hope Saints have been on the phone to arrange the WCC match - yes we know they will probably get beaten but I would love to see Penrith against this very good Saints team - you never know...

 

[unapologetic pedant]

36 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

To be honest with you, I am OK with this.

I love to see the commentary team to just get on with the game and not forensically go back to previous plays to find fault with a play or the referee's decision.

So you`re OK with commentaries that repeatedly tell viewers that officials are missing things with no opportunity to demonstrate that the ref was right and the commentators were wrong?

[Dunbar]

2 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

So you`re OK with commentaries that repeatedly tell viewers that officials are missing things with no opportunity to demonstrate that the ref was right and the commentators were wrong?

I don't believe that this problem is nearly as bad you believe it to be.

I don't think the Australian commentators are that bad in suggesting the ref's are missing things.  There are many times I have watched games thinking that there may have been something to check (not necessarily a ref's error - maybe a player mistake) but the commentators let it slide and we never go back to the replay to check.

Maybe as a try is scored, but we get replays and the bunker checking each try anyway so that is natural. 

It is an absolute obsession in the UK game to try and find controversy in every game but I don't see that with the Aussies.

Have to say, your post suggests that referees and commentators should be pitted together every game to see who got the most calls right and that in itself is not healthy.

[unapologetic pedant]

6 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

It is an absolute obsession in the UK game to try and find controversy in every game but I don't see that with the Aussies.

On what I see, I detect no difference between UK and Oz. The ramifications are worse for NRL officials because the media scrutiny is wider and more intense. For good or ill, there`s nothing like the Annesley Monday morning Football briefing at RFL headquarters. Nor is there anything like Fox League.

 

14 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

but the commentators let it slide and we never go back to the replay to check.

Most people have scant understanding of Rugby League Football. If too many things are allowed to slide, they never will have much understanding. And are far less likely to really enjoy watching it.

If commentators (particularly co-commentators) are not there to explain, what are they there for? And if they are not qualified to perform the task, we need to know. Not least, so that they can improve.

In a recent game which featured an 8-point try, Kyle Amor tried to explain what was happening. Said the ref had got it wrong and delivered a dog`s dinner about a penalty try. Which only proved how clueless he was. Is the best response to that, "just get on with the game"?

33 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Have to say, your post suggests that referees and commentators should be pitted together every game to see who got the most calls right 

I think not.

[Dave T]

45 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

 

It is an absolute obsession in the UK game to try and find controversy in every game but I don't see that with the Aussies.

On this point I don't think it is that bad, certainly not since the days of Eddie and Stevo, but Sky's pundits are so bad it can go down that route. The level of coverage from C4 this year was good in this area, they didn't ignore things, they showed the replays and discussed them, but didn't obsess as much as some others can. I found that a better balance than both the NRL and Sky coverage. 

[Dunbar]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

On this point I don't think it is that bad, certainly not since the days of Eddie and Stevo, but Sky's pundits are so bad it can go down that route. The level of coverage from C4 this year was good in this area, they didn't ignore things, they showed the replays and discussed them, but didn't obsess as much as some others can. I found that a better balance than both the NRL and Sky coverage. 

Yes, it is better now in the UK.

Edited October 3, 2022 by Dunbar

[Dunbar]

9 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

I think not

You may think not.  But saying "commentaries that repeatedly tell viewers that officials are missing things with no opportunity to demonstrate that the ref was right and the commentators were wrong" is simply saying that for every incident and throughout the game, we need to see who was right in the call, the commentator or the referee.

I am of the opinion that this isn't healthy at all and I would much rather see everyone - players, referee's, fans and commentators -  move past any incident without the need to see who was 'right' and who was 'wrong'.  How can that possibly be healthy and lead to good sport.

[DavidM]

1 hour ago, Mr Frisky said:

I hope Saints have been on the phone to arrange the WCC match - yes we know they will probably get beaten but I would love to see Penrith against this very good Saints team - you never know...

 

I was reading a snippet from Ivan Cleary saying he was up for it and Saints are always up for it

[unapologetic pedant]

14 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

That habit of failing to show significant moments again while lingering over insignificant moments is routine in RL TV coverage. 

This was my central criticism. 

48 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

You may think not.  But saying "commentaries that repeatedly tell viewers that officials are missing things with no opportunity to demonstrate that the ref was right and the commentators were wrong" is simply saying that for every incident and throughout the game, we need to see who was right in the call, the commentator or the referee.

I believe we do need to understand significant calls. Otherwise, we won`t understand the game. That can be different from determining whether they were strictly accurate or not.

Competent TV directors should be able to distinguish between replays which would benefit from analysis and enhance appreciation of the game and those which wouldn`t. 

[lucky 7]

It can't be ignored that the NRL and Super League grand finals were won by teams who put a lot into junior development. Certain other clubs need to take note of this

[Damien]

All a bit random

 

 

[unapologetic pedant]

On 02/10/2022 at 11:30, The Rocket said:

Penrith`s relentless lift and drag back is against the spirit of the game for me, suffocates opposition teams attack and makes games unbearable to watch. 

I`ve posted this previously. Been checking the rulebook for something else so, once again, for your delectation, this is under "Moving tackled player" -

"Where opponents do not make a tackle effective in the quickest possible manner but attempt to push, pull or carry the player in possession, it is permissible for colleagues of the tackled player to lend their weight in order to avoid losing ground. Immediately this happens the referee should call Held"

Possible loophole in that being moved sideways doesn`t technically constitute "losing ground". We currently see ball-carriers held up and dragged several metres towards and over the touchline even when "colleagues lend their weight". Thereby de facto narrowing the width of the pitch and restricting the space an attacking team has to work with.

This needs to be looked at and clarified. We changed the corner post rule for similar reasons.

[fighting irish]

11 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

I`ve posted this previously. Been checking the rulebook for something else so, once again, for your delectation, this is under "Moving tackled player" -

"Where opponents do not make a tackle effective in the quickest possible manner but attempt to push, pull or carry the player in possession, it is permissible for colleagues of the tackled player to lend their weight in order to avoid losing ground. Immediately this happens the referee should call Held"

Possible loophole in that being moved sideways doesn`t technically constitute "losing ground". We currently see ball-carriers held up and dragged several metres towards and over the touchline even when "colleagues lend their weight". Thereby de facto narrowing the width of the pitch and restricting the space an attacking team has to work with.

This needs to be looked at and clarified. We changed the corner post rule for similar reasons.

Thank goodness, about time too. 

[anjado]

Teams have been doing this for 20 years it started with the Roosters under Ricky Stuart. Too call it cheating is a massive stretch since no one cared back then why should they now. It's such an obscure rule and when things like voluntary tackles are allowed multiple times a match it's really nothing.