NRL Head of Football Graham Annesley has used the majority of his weekly address to speak on the events that occurred at the end of last night’s clash between the Tigers and Cowboys in Townsville.
Though plenty of heated debate has occurred in the hours since the controversial decisions that closed the game, Annesley went to lengths to defend the referees and their role in events, emphasising the complexity of the situation and suggesting a general lack of knowledge of the rules for the heated fallout.
In regards to whether or not the Cowboys should have been allowed to kick-off following the Tigers’ final attacking play that looked to have sealed victory as clocks ran out on broadcast screens, Annesley advised that time-keeping is not the referee’s job.
“The referee has no control over time,” Annesley said.
“There are independent timekeepers who are in touch with the referee through communications equipment. They count them down at the end.
“The referee can’t stop the game until the time-keeper tells them time has expired. That hadn’t happened when the kick-off took place.”
Annesley then went on to discuss the Captain’s Challenge, in an arguably less convincing fashion.
“This is only the third season of the captain’s challenge,” Annesley said at the outset.
“It was introduced the help get more decisions correct, and across the course of the past three seasons there have been over 360 correct challenges of decisions that were wrong, so it’s an important component of our game.”
“In our view it was allowable (at the end of the Tigers v Cowboys game) for a number of reasons. The rules talk about a captain being able to challenge any decision made by the referee that stops the game.
“On this occasion, the referee blows the whistle after the time-keeper tells him the time has expired, to stop play. That’s so the player in possession can’t just get up and play the ball – but that’s not the end of the game.
“The first whistle is not the full-time whistle, that’s a whistle to stop play. That becomes a stoppage, and the challenge was mounted.
“You won’t find anywhere a black-and-white specific rule that talks about whether you can make a challenge after time has expired on the last play of the game.
“It’s an unusual situation, but if you think about the objective of the captain’s challenge, it was introduced so that when there are errors, there’s an option for the team to have that error corrected. It’s to try and make sure big decisions made incorrectly can be corrected in a review.”
Unfortunately, Annesley’s argument that the captain’s challenge has helped ensure the correct decisions are made was quickly undone. The Head of Football went on to admit that while the challenge was permissible, the penalty that resulted in the match-winning conversion should never have been paid.
“We examined (the obstruction) carefully this morning. We have looked at the available footage and we are not satisfied there was enough in the incident to warrant the decision of the bunker to award a penalty.
“Yes, there was contact, but we believe the Wests Tigers player involved was heading towards the ball. He didn’t look over his shoulder to see who was coming.
“On review, we don’t believe there was enough to award the penalty, and it should have been dismissed as an unsuccessful challenge.”
“We’re comfortable the intent of the rule was carried through.”
It’s hard to believe that admission will sit well with Tigers fans, or fans of the other teams chasing the Cowboys for second place on the ladder. The controversial win keeps the Cowboys two points clear of the Sharks and Broncos, and that one incorrect decision could have implications for all of them as we near the end of the season.
As for the Tigers, they could be celebrating and buoyed with confidence after their best performance of the season helped them get off the bottom of the ladder. But they aren’t.