No Penrith?

Ooops. I thought I put them first. They are going to be the hardest win. But Parra have them all this year

I also think we as fans need to get over the loser mentality. Blame everybody mentality. Our team lost because they didn’t out score the opposition. We need to build a team that beats everybody else on the scoreboard. Including refs. We need to make every tackle even with 2 players in the bin. We need to score at every opportunity. Even if the forwards can’t get out of their own half. 

I don't like it,  but agree Parra are definitely  in it up to their  necks.

It's not for me.
It reinforces a couple of my earlier posts that's its all about perception....
You did well compiling those stats MDog and I would hope the club did the same or was made aware of it.
It is rather obvious that G Sutton has a lower threshold or higher sensitivity to Desball or any gameplan that that does not promote expansive rugby league. He will subconsciously penalise a team who relies on slowing the game up.

I'd be interested to know what his stats look like against teams who also played that style (Manly, Sharks) in that time.

Agreed and well said.
As often said, the good teams win even with things going against them, low completion rates, penalty counts, sin bins etc.
Win games and the above "things" become secondary factors. Keep losing and they become focal points to detract from the true problems.

The problem is no longer needing a total rebuild.

We need to sign the missing pieces, not a whole team.

The remaining players need to improve and develop better habits.

The team needs to develop better combinations, trust and resilience.

A few wins will turn the corner, the way to achieve those wins is improve the defence and reduce unforced errors.

Im of the opinion that you need influential players in key positions to instigate cultural change.

Unfortunately compared to 2009, we didn't change the key hooker position and our new guys just arent assertive enough to change the culture of the team. It has resulted in our new guys having to change themselves to play off JMK style rather than other way around. We definitely still have too much focus on forwards play which is to our detriment.

The best example of what I mean is Luke Thompson. This is a guy who timed his runs well last couple of years and ran onto the ball off the ruck. You look at him now, and he's had to adjust his run to receive that slow pass off the ruck, and he is less effective.

Same would have happened with CHR had he stayed. We shall see what happens with Kikau next year. He is lucky he us joining with Mahoney and nit this year. We'd send him backwards with our style.

Hadn't watched many Sharks games last year or this year, but I watched last night and was very impressed with Sharks hooker Brailey.

It's no wonder they are doing well. He thinks on his feet and knows when to NOT pass or hold the pass up.

Hooker is one of the missing pieces and will be fixed next year.

Then explain why Melbourne can have a microsleep on every tackle and yet rarely get pinged for it. No the refs have a bias against certain teams.

Like I said - perception....
Storm might lie on top of tackled players but they start a roll-off procedure in sequence, so it looks like there is activity in the ruck and the ref isn't inclined to call them out for it. They are very good at it and it has taken many years to perfect.

We on the other hand, are extremely poor. In fact, I dare say we are the worst. We have a tendency to both hold down ir get tangled and both release simultaneously. In order to try to slow down, we tend to hold down for longer and ultimately get pinged. 

It's definitely an area we can improve on. The leeway the top teams get (which is what Payten and Holbrook were referring to) definitely exists but it's something you have to earn by being a top team and playing the game the way the NRL wants it played.

Take it or leave it.

I'll leave it. It doesn't matter if you roll off in "sequence" or not, if you take 3 seconds to get off the player and not get scrutinised, yet, a team than lays there but is off in 2.5 seconds and  gets penalised then there is a bias. Marki, you can't sugar coat a turd and pass it off as candy. The only consistancy in the refereeing standard is that they are poor and seem almost incompetent.

There is the flaw in your arguement right there... who gives a fvck about the way the NRLol want the game to be played. The game and its' rules have been around for over 100 years and these "goons" in charge want to try and change the way the game is played.

The English Super League is always an enjoyable view....the refs are barely noticeable yet don't appear to lose authority....could our two learned "M" experts kindly explain. They also appear to e uniform and also are not too chummy with the players.

If we are the ones at fault by holding  down too long why is our ptb speed usually slower. Should be the opposite

I think refs should start dealing with fact rzther than deliberate or intent. Leads to inconsistency.

2 different metrics I would imagine.
If im not mistaken, PTB speed would be the time from ref calling held to clearing the ruck. We somehow end up like cockroaches on our backs and take an eternity to play the ball.

I don't disagree.
But refs are human and have to apply the rules based on how they see things. If you play the game in a manner that looks wrong, expect them to call it wrong. Even if it's not wrong.

They aren't computers. 

When the rules are vsgue inconsistencies can emerge, which can favor one side, or promote techniques not in the historical version of the game and which are not what fans want to see. Particularly as coaches know an advantage at the ruck is all important.

Fans want to see footy, not wrestling. Fans don't want to see surrender tackles.

My solution
1. Call held whenever a third man joins a tackle.
2. Any wresting move after held is called is an automatic 6-again / penalty.
3. Hold downs are only allowed for surrender tackles.

A quick game means lot of action and likely blow out scores, to counter that the scorer should kick off, the bench and interchange should be increased.

Wrong, wrong, wrong... the refs have to apply the rules "as they are written". And if they call it wrong and it's not wrong then they should have to justify their decision and explain why they got it wrong. Marki I am not just talking out of my @rse on this one. My real life job is to audit the workers on sites and ensure they are complying with the rules snd procedures in place. The only difference is that if I don't ensure the workers get it right the end result could end up in fatalities. In the game of rugby league the rules are set up to ensure a fair game, the referees placing their own "interpretation" on the rules negates the rules effectivness. So yes the refs can and do influence the results of a match.... and it must be stopped.

I hear you ODF and in an ideal world, the least we can expect is consistency. The game and rules are progressive. I know the purists don't like it, but that's just life.

What I found most interesting and concerning, is MDogs summary of G Sutton. He was outside the spectrum of the other refs in his application of penalties and end results.

This may point to a personality problem, perception problem or a rule application problem. Either way, the NRL should address his performance relative to the others, but we should stop looking at blaming refs for our poor performance or gamestyle we wish to play - especially if it gives rise to being penalised.

We play a low percentage gamestyle that relies heavily on even share or penalties, 6 agains and field position. Its time we rethink the way we play amd eliminate (or reduce)  things out of our control. That's the problem I have with our team.

Fair comment Marki, and I agree, we don't play expansive football and what the team is dishing out is boring, methodical, slow and predictable but there are some referees that make us look worse than we really are. I feel the NRLol especially the head of refereeing is not addressing the problem and by doing so are condoning bad refereeing practices. If this is the case then they need to be removed from the game.

Further to our performance under G Sutton. Through rounds 1 to 6:
Penalties for 41, against 40.
Restarts for 16, against 21
Restarts rounds 1 to 5: for 14, against 12
Restarts round 6: for 2 against 9
Did our discipline really deteriorate that badly overnight.

In the context of things - Yes.
It was very noticeable that our gameplan against Souths was to slow them down. Most refs would have penalised us.

In fact I'll go as far to say we got very lucky we were given leeway against Penrith. I myself would have penalised us on some slow ruck clearances and yet the ref didnt.

We arent a smart enough team to adjust to ref tolerance levels. IMO we should train to he well below the threshold, not AT the threshold.

Smart teams might push the envelope but can change and adjust mid game. We can't. We are robots. You only get to programme us in the lead up to a game. Never during or at half time.

Playing expansive football on the back of a slow play the ball is hard.

I am not happy with some of the service from dummy-half and some of the link passing by Jacko.

Apart from that our attack is good, especially since Flanno and Wakeham have returned and Averillo shifted to the centres.

Hard running props and second rowers with the ability to break tackles would make a difference.

Mindlessly throwing the ball wide, we already do enough of that, more would be a disaster.

Our attack is good enough or close to the best we can do with the current squad.

Defence and execution need a lot of work. Let's get better at the passes we do throw before throwing more.

Best players to throw passes - Flanno, Duffty and Wakeham.
Next best - Burton and Averillo.

We need to use offloads from TPJ and King.

There is no problem with scoring 16-20 points per game, that should be good enough to win.
Conceeding 20-36 points per game is a formula for losing and always has been.
There is nothing we can do to the attack to overcome conceding 20-36.

The ref and the ruck make a difference in attack and defence.
It is easier to defend slow play the balls and very hard to attack.

What we got from Sutton is what we always get, shoddy biased unprofessional referring which is an embarrassment to the game. With that kind of performance from the ref, our chances of winning any game are low.

But if we fix what we need to fix, they are much higher.

Now tell me that the Storm and Manly were not excessively wrestling us and paying little penalty.

If there is inconsistency between refs that is a problem.

The refs don't even treat both sides the same in the same game, some are worse than others.

The way the ruck is managed set refs up the fail, the way coaches coach exploits this.

Still the solution is to get better in attack and defence, when we are doing everything perfectly is the time to complain and also the time when the ref will not cost us the game.

The contrast is too stark to be casually dismissed. Why would our game plan need to slow the rabbits anymore than it was needed to slow .
the attacks of the storm and panthers.

We all know that Melbourne are the masters of the wrestle. The 6 again rule was brought in to stop the slowing of the ptb but the coaches are making a mockery of V'Landys dumb rule change. The storm (as Marki puts it) are peeling slowly off the tackled player givng a false impression they are acting within the rules, but they are still rorting the system AND getting a leg up by receiving set restarts when other teams are doing exactly the same thing, only not as efficiently.

Perception should not play a part in the application of laws.  The law should be clearly defined and equally applied. The same as a knock on is a knock on or a foot in touch is out. It should not be subject to a referees interpretation or tolerance.