Some Eels fans have suggested the Warriors were robbed by the referee.

At first it appeared to me it was a case of a ref's home game bias, with a 9-2 penalty count against the Warriors. But let's look at all the penalties:

3388803360?profile=RESIZE_710x

There was only 1 penalty for offside (against the Warriors), and 1 for a slow peel (against us). Hardly monolithic bias robbing the Warriors.

The rest of the 8 (out of 9) penalities against the Warriors were for dangerous tackles, grapple tackles or ball strips.

So the Warriors were to blame for their misery.

They tried to physically bully us and crossed the line, at times. It could be argued they were lucky they had no sin-binnings.They probably knew if they uped the ante we might crack in a dogfight.

Also on that 76' minute "forward pass"

It would have won the Warriors the game in the dying minutes, but in my mind it was forward out of the hand; possibly assisted by the forward momentum of the tackle.

3389065891?profile=RESIZE_710x

3389066432?profile=RESIZE_710x

3389067705?profile=RESIZE_710x

3389068482?profile=RESIZE_710x

How the ball travelled so far forward in a short distance, without travelling forward from the hand - unless touched by Sivo or  ungodly invisible mini-tornado that struck briefly - seems unreasonable. 

Also Roger landed on his back so even if at some point his hand was facing backwards (in a snap shot) immediately later he was swung around onto his back in the motion of passing (between 2 and 3).

Yet, why the bunker can rule on offside for kicks but not check forward passes, I struggle to understand. And then Drones aren't expensive if we are worried about angle software vision and serious about trying to be consist. It's a constant point of contention.

But

On us, and only us - is our consistently shaky, often soft-bellied defence. One of the worst in the NRL.

The reason we will always struggle to win consistently and crack.

It is a big issue. Especially in the last 10 years. Statistically, our defence is the worst we've had -  bottom 3 this decade and on par this year - since our inception and the 1950's when we had the worst defence in the comp and were winning spoons for fun. We rely on attacking flair to get us out of trouble or avoid defending too much. And if it weren't for new buys Sivo, Fergo, Lane, Paulo, an improved Moses, helping Gutho who generally tries hard, adding more attacking nous, I'd wager we'd be in the bottom 4 this year. 

In 2019 we win by the biggest margins in the comp (18.4 av.ppg) , and lose by the second biggest margins (at 15.9 ppg, Knights worst at 16.4). That tells you a bit.

For me, as much as I love defensive fortitude, and toughness, the highlight was a rampanging Sivo look yesterday. Eric Grothe Snr would be proud. What a buy. Now for a few more forwards who are tough, mobile and good lateral defenders and a cultural attitude-shift in our defence. 

3388952688?profile=RESIZE_710x

 

3390711244?profile=RESIZE_710x

The Aftermath: Monday 29th July

In the aftermath of this match 4 refs are dropped for R20: Chris Sutton, Chris Buttler, plus touch judges Clayton Sharpe and Adam Cassidy, for 4 items.

  1. 15' try to Warriors' Luke, wrongly awarded. They missed a knock-on by Papalii Warriors leading up to the try.
  2. 46' try to Eels' Sivo wrongly awarded. They missed a knock-on by Dylan Brown's 
  3. 45' strip by CHT was incorrect ruling.
  4. A missed penalty to Warriors: a Gutherson strip was missed.

Okay that means the score should have been an Eels 18-16 with an 8-3 penalty count (instead of 24-22, 9-2)

And "that forward pass" remains as mysterious and contentious as ever.

But the NRL are considering using hawk-eye for tried scored.

Considering we are the 2nd least penalised club in the comp it will be interesting to see how the refs treat us this week. 

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • RTS pass was forward...

    In the lead up to Lukes try was a knock on 

    Bout time Parramatta got the rob of the green in  penaltie count/calls go there way during the match

    im sure there were other 50/50 calls aswell 

  • Good analysis. I think the Warriors came to be super aggressive and they did a great job imo. But the penalties they copped were fair enough. Hard to argue with dangerous contact and two man in the tackle strips etc. 

    They played like they were fighting for their season. I thought the Warriors were pretty good. We were better and deserved our win. 

    That try of Gutherson’s in the second half was pure magic. It was a really good game of footy. 

    • I was at the game; we looked the better side and had their measure. They scored two soft tries largely because of our inexperience on the left side. 

      The Warriors scored a try in a set that included two knock-ons. If Luke maintained possession, then I'm a brain surgeon. 

      The game was frustrating to watch. we always looked like we going to open the game and win comfortably, it just didn't happen. 

      I was proud of the boys, they kept their composure and, in the end, won ugly. The Warriors should have had more penalties against them, the slowed the play the ball on just about every tackle, they laid all over us, pushing their luck knowing the refs will only blow so many penalties. 

      It was humorous listening to Kearney talk about penalties like there is a set amount awarded fairly between two teams. 

      I also found it hilarious when he said, "piss off the stripping rule" The Warriors are the kings of the strip, I don't think any other club has focussed more on stripping the ball. The Warriors have made stripping their go to play. I hate it, it's a cheap and ugly way to win possession. Two defenders pulling the attackers arms apart, the third defender grips the ball, the first two defenders peel off once the third defender has a firm grip of the ball. Kearney, it's grub tactic and against the spirit of the game, in my opinion, it's cheating. How can a strip be deemed one on one when three players are involved in the act? 

      Players deserve to lose possession when they don’t respect the ball, during a failed offload or carry the ball loosely Alvaro had the ball held securely, his only intent was to make metres, he was a victim of a planned ploy to be stripped of the ball. This led to a Warriors try.

      Allowing this goes against the grain of the game, in my opinion, the defender should not be playing at the ball, if you want the ball, earn it by forcing an error, at the moment, watching a defender and the attacker tugging at the ball like two 5 year-olds fighting over a toy is a blight on the game.

      The Warriors played within the rules, but they came with the intention of scraping the lowest part of the barrel. Were they hard done by? They gambled, they scrambled, they pushed the boundaries and were happy to use cheap tactics to gain an advantage. They still lost, suck shit.

       

  • Great analysis.  Warriors certainly came to bully us! 

    Our forwards don't have that intimidation factor. Opposition teams don't fear our physicality.  Consequently opposition teams play open, aggressive and enterprising footy. 

    The above has been the case with Parramatta for as long as I can remember.  

  • Yes good analysis. I watched a replay of the gene today and actually if you are talking about genuine 50/50 calls I still think the Warriors got them. Examples are the Luke try and a clear knock on in the lead up and a clear strip on Tepai.

    Also the eels has a lot more scoring opportunities and line breaks that weren’t converted. The warriors basically scored every time they had a sniff.

    there is no way the warriors ‘deserved’ to win  that game. The only clearly wrong decision they copped was the strip call. That’s one call. Who cares? 

    • Yeah, Michael, really good points, as usual. On some weeks some of these might end up penalities or turnovers:

      1. Knock on by warriors (right edge) before Luke's burrowing try, which could have been a no-try on a bad week.
      2. CHT's second strip, on Nathan Brown, 45' appeared an incorrect ruling.
      3. The strip on Meroa.
      4. Mid-air tackle on Parry.
      5. 75' voluntary tackle by Moses.

      I'm probably missing a heap, that don't come to mind. And it happens every week: contentious decisions. 

      Just this week "that forward pass" and 9-2 count made it appear a bit more rotten.

      One thing is at least the ref let the play flow, a bit, without too many ruck penalty-a-thons. There was only 1 peel and 1 offside. It's seems a long way from what we saw last year.

       

  • Good post HOE, only needed because of the surprising amount of people on here dissapointed in our win. I swear some of them prefer it when we loose so they can put the boot in.

    • Thanks StrangeEel, Yes I admit, I too, suspected maybe the refs were a bit biased and we were lucky, but on review I think the Warriors created misfortune for themselves by trying too eagerly to win the physical battle.

      It reminds me of what Jack Gibson said. Despite being a fighter good with his fists, was totally against going overboard in rough-house play on-field as it was ill-disciplined. 

      Even though I do love a bit of biff and aggressive defences, he has a point.

  • All i can say aboit time we get the 50/50 call go our way and now can we win away from home and beat Norman Dragons 

  • Next week

    1: C Gutherson

    2: M Sivo

    3: B Takarangi 

    4: W Blake

    5: B Ferguson ( he should be back ) 

    6: D Brown

    7: M Moses

    8: Jr Paulo

    9: R Mahoney 

    10: K Evans

    11: S Lane

    12: M Nuikore 

    13: N Brown

     

    14: P Terepo 

    15: O Kaufusi 

    16: D Alvaro

    17: M Mau 

     

    Rest D Gower and T Moeroa 

    I think Ferguson will be back, Lane and Terepo will also be back.

    there was no one from wenty that impressed me yesterday.

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Snottie Pimpin replied to Eelawarra's discussion EELS COACH JASON RYLES PUSHED TO SIGN OFF ON ZAC LOMAX’S RELEASE REQUEST - THIS IS WHY
"Lomax is picked in Origin because hes a big body who excels in bringing the ball out of yardage which is perfect for Origin. Hes not a bad player.  Hes a great athlete who can make something from nothing. Having said that, he wants to play centre…"
15 minutes ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Eelawarra's discussion EELS COACH JASON RYLES PUSHED TO SIGN OFF ON ZAC LOMAX’S RELEASE REQUEST - THIS IS WHY
""
42 minutes ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Eelawarra's discussion EELS COACH JASON RYLES PUSHED TO SIGN OFF ON ZAC LOMAX’S RELEASE REQUEST - THIS IS WHY
"No I wouldn't I'd call him a genius for understanding and building depth what you call the dopes here we give away our best and have fark all behind it.
The worst thing and the kick in the nuts again Cameron's a Parra guy yet he's farked off and…"
1 hour ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Eelawarra's discussion EELS COACH JASON RYLES PUSHED TO SIGN OFF ON ZAC LOMAX’S RELEASE REQUEST - THIS IS WHY
"We don't care if they do have a trick lined up. Pezet has an All-night Greek Girlfriend exp in Brisbane booked  but we flagged him down for some rest-stop car-meat action  en route....sly dogs we are"
2 hours ago
More…