The Cumberland Throw

Analysing The Loss – But Maintaining The Rage!

Losing to the Cowboys was a bitter pill. In a match which was likely to define just how far the Eels team has come in less than 12 months, it was frustrating to have that opportunity taken away from the players. Yet in venting my frustration and rage with the officiating I must also acknowledge aspects of Parramatta’s performance that require improvement. When it comes time for Brad Arthur to do the same, I’m certain that his analysis will weigh more heavily on what the team needs to address to ensure that we can better control the destiny of a match.

The Parramatta Performance

(This assessment will be done without consideration of statistics. Such analysis will come later in the week.)

The opening exchanges of this match were brutal. The impact created as  powerful charges were met by crunching tackles cannot be measured in any statistic. The rugby league public were looking forward to the clash between two in-form packs and the first twenty minutes did not disappoint. One could sense that something special was unfolding and the commentators were in raptures about what they were seeing.

Skipping the contentious decisions for now, the first half ended with Parramatta 14 points behind, but wondering how this could have occurred. The possession rate was in their favour and the Cowboys had many moments when they looked out on their feet. Thinking back to past matches, I remained confident that the Eels could finish over the Cowboys. The question of course was whether 14 points would be too great a hurdle.

Being brutally honest, the second half performance by our team took me back to 2015. The Eels fought back to hit the lead midway through the second half, only to see that lead count for nothing in the end. How familiar does this sound? It was the common scenario in nearly every loss last year. In two of the Eels three losses this year the team has been in control of the match, only to lose within the final “quarter”. There is no doubt that Parramatta fights for 80 minutes, they now need to play smart for 80 minutes.

Undoubtedly Brad Arthur will focus his match review on factors the players can control.

Undoubtedly Brad Arthur will focus his match review on factors the players can control.

This loss of match control against the Cowboys came down to handling errors and penalties. A 50% completion rate would lose you any match! The handling errors can be rectified and it’s certainly drilled at training. Such errors place unnecessary pressure on the defence at a time when the team should be driving home it’s ascendency in the match. It should also be acknowledged that a couple of Parramatta’s in-form forwards did not play their best football. Paulo, Terepo and Alvaro probably had their least effective matches this year, notably in attack. They will need to step up next week against the Dogs.

The penalties are another matter and although discipline can remedy some calls, others are not always within the players’ domain. It’s frustrating that in spite of a litany of handling errors the Eels were still in a position to win the match. Until…..

The Match Officiating 

During this match, at three crucial moments, the momentum and ascendency was stripped from the Eels by highly contentious officiating.

1. Foran No-Try

This left me speechless. To suggest that the decoy line run by Manu Ma’u either took a defender out, or impacted in any way the likelihood of that defender preventing the try, was ludicrous in the extreme. The resultant penalty catapulted the Cowboys deep into Parramatta territory and resulted in a try to the Cows. Bingo – 12 point turn around! The Parramatta momentum was halted and psychologically North Queensland were boosted immeasurably.

I have been a huge critic of the bunker this year and I fully intend to maintain the rage. The sooner that obstruction calls are taken out of the bunker’s sphere of influence and left in the hands of the on field officials who have a genuine feel for whether a defender has actually been impeded, the better.

2. Danny Wicks No-Try Review

A little more subtle yet just as effective for impacting Parramatta’s surge. It was easily discernible that Wicks did not get to the try line. He did not claim a try and the referee was not doing Parramatta any favours in going to a review. The Cowboys were scattered in defence and on the back foot. Parramatta looked like busting them open at any moment and indeed it was only desperation in defence from Coote which had prevented Wicks from scoring. The review process gave North Queensland the opportunity to organise their defence and get air back into their lungs. This decision was one of the most concerning of the night for mine, and I hope that it forms part of BA’s report to Tony Archer.

Danny Wicks never claimed a try. Why did it go for review?

Danny Wicks never claimed a try. Why did it go for review?

3. The Corey Norman Sin Binning

Not for one moment would I suggest that Corey Norman did not commit an offence which could lead to the sin bin being used. What I will again comment on is the incredible inconsistency. Actually scrap that. The lack of use of the sin bin has been a feature of the 2016 season. The question was continually asked, “When will the sin bin be used?” It was a fair question given the range of professional fouls escaping punishment. We now have an answer – “It will be used against the Eels at the most crucial time in a big match!”

Should the match officials continue to apply this penalty consistently in season 2016, I will be less aggrieved. Hands up if you think that this is a likely scenario.

Other Areas For Concern

It’s impossible to raise these concerns without appearing to be a whinging fan. However, the following did not escape my attention.

  • Laying over the tackled player in the ruck. Quite a lot of latitude was allowed in this area. Watch the replay and judge for yourself.
  • Hands on the ball in the ruck/stripping the ball. Two crucial decisions went against the Eels here. In the first half a stripping penalty bumped up the Cowboys lead to 14 after what looked to be a simple lost possession. In the second half, a blatant strip on Manu Ma’u was ruled as lost possession as the Eels mounted an attack deep in Cowboys territory.
  • Relaxed friendly banter between the referee and Thurston when the match was in the balance. Not a good look!

Not for one moment would I suggest untoward officiating. However the  referees must be consistent in their application of the rules and must be seen to enjoy the same impartial relationships with the players of both teams. I’m not sure that this was “seen” last night.

Final Thoughts

The Cowboys are an exceptional football team. There is no shame in losing a tight encounter to them in Townsville. In an honest assessment they were better disciplined than the Eels last night and placed themselves in the better position to achieve victory.

Nonetheless, every crucial call appeared to fall their way and I am both angered by that inconsistency, yet buoyed that given an even split of decisions that the Eels can easily reverse the result next time round.

Sixties

All images courtesy of the Parramatta Eels

If you liked this article, you might consider supporting The Cumberland Throw.

14 thoughts on “Analysing The Loss – But Maintaining The Rage!

  1. Parramatta Tragic

    Cant add or subtract too much to what you have summed up sixties.
    We brought our “C” game and Cowboys brought their “A” game. We have at least two more notches that we can go up. They don’t. BA will not have us firing on all eight cylinders until late in the season. He will bring us to our best ready for the semi finals. I still think we will win the comp.
    Some of the worst officiating since Greg Hartley

  2. hola1

    In regards to the sin-binning, a few weeks ago in the Roosters vs Warriors match there was a similar incident where they did not use the sin bin and Tony Archer came out after the game saying it was the wrong call and the sin bin should have been used. Last week in the Tigers v Storm game Chris Lawrence was held back in the same situation and the Storm player got sin binned. Last night Norman did the same thing to Morgan and he too got sin binned. Since Tony Archer made his statement that the referee got it wrong by not sin binning the player who held the attacking player back it seems they have been consistent with the call.

  3. Benny

    What did you think about the elbow that Coote used to enter contact against Danny Wicks? It is clear in the highlight clips as it was during the match. Why was this also ignored?

  4. Keeneel

    I do not dispute what you have said hola 1, however if an interpretation of a rule has changed the NRL should notify all coaches in writing. It is not the role of the clubs or coaches to view all interviews or comments by Tony Archer, so they can understand the new interpretations of the rules for future.

    I must admit I do not know if they was any written communications sent to the clubs or coaches, however I doubt that BA would have reacted the way he did if there had been proper written communications.

  5. Gustarny-Gianni

    Pretty spot on Analysing there Sixties we are certainly consistantly getting the wrong end of the pineapple .I was sitting there watching the Manu strip when memories of the penrith game came back but on this occasion there was no reversal of the decision.We are a great side this year it is awesome to watch our boys play with aggression and be in the contest we just need some fine tuning which will come.

    1. sixties Post author

      It’s been a tough draw to start the year. If we go back to the start of the year, we’d take a 5/3 result from this draw. The annoying aspect is that it could easily be 7/1. I don’t want to look back from years end and reflect on it from a could have perspective.

  6. Trapped in the 1970's

    Maybe split the difference with 6-2 as they surely butchered the Penrith game well and truly being up by enough with only 7 minutes to go even though in that game Penrith as visitors were refereed like they were the home side. As for the cows the other night I’m still dirty about the refs interpretations of how long each team was allowed to lay on the tackled player as well as loose carry vs. stripped possession. Both were so one sided it wasn’t true and penalties are momentum changes as everyone knows. Throw in the Wicks incident and the extra 10 for back chatting on half time to within kicking range and my rage continues.

  7. Grumpy

    I WILL say it ,selective refereeing at best ,the amount of double standard rulings was endless,didnt want us to win and made sure of it ,when we fought back to 16 v 14 the calls all suddenly went totally against us ,anyone who dosent think refs show bias has no clue of footy , we wernt meant to win so we didnt its that simple, the best scenario for nrl is when points are deducted we still wouldnt have made semis with them then theres no whingeing , so totally refereed out of it ,yep yep yep

  8. Jason

    Another great assessment of the game Sixties!
    I do agree with everything you have written and the laying over the tackled player by the opposition is the one area that really gets to me, seems we get penalized for this infringement constantly yet our opposition seem to be able to lie over us for an eternity and nothing? My 9 year daughter even noticed this without me suggesting it, yet the refs don’t seem to? Hope BA gets stuck into Archer like Hasler does as I notice when Hasler has a dummy spit, the calls seem to go their way the following week!

    1. Anonymous

      The same rules apply to both teams. We need to see them applied equally. Parra made far too many mistakes, yet they were still in a position to win it. In this match, a crucial decision determined the finish. After another sin-binning in the Manly/Knights game, are we going to go from one extreme to another?

  9. Anonymous

    After this weekend it now appears that we will have a flood of sin-binning. One extreme to another. You’ve got to love reactionary interpretations. Do you think the latest edict has been handed down?

  10. Kramerica

    Based on EVERY other game played so far this year, Norman’s sin binning was the most bizarre thing I have seen on a footy field this year. Everything the refs have done so far has indicated the sin bin for such indiscretions is not an option then out of the blue this happens.
    Would we have won the game, or at the very least finished a lot closer had Normie stayed on the park?. We will never know.
    Thanks for a great article sixties 🙂

    1. sixties Post author

      Cheers K Man. It’s 3 days later and I’m still annoyed. In my admittedly biased eyes it seemed like every crucial call fell the Cows way. Still, I know that BA will be looking to eliminate our own errors as he prepares for this week.

      1. Grunta

        The sin bin hasn’t only not been used in 2016 but for the past few years.
        I like the use of the bin and it’s about time. Unfortunately for us Norman did indeed deserve to be binned as long as we see some consistency with this for the remainder of the year.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *