As the 2024 NRL season continues into Round 3, Real or Not looks at the uphill battle the Broncos faced in Penrith, the need to ban on-field interviews with potty-mouthed players, and the often infuriating inconsistency of match officials.
Read on as we tackle some of the big talking points in this week's NRL Real or Not.
An already tough task made impossible for Broncos
REAL: It is going to be tough for the Broncos to repeat the success of 2023, after losing Herbie Farnworth and Tom Flegler during the offseason. It was going to be very tough for them to take on the Panthers without Adam Reynolds and Payne Haas, both out with knee injuries. But, to lose Reece Walsh in the opening exchanges made victory in Penrith completely impossible.
Walsh is usually the attacking spark for the Broncos, but without the scheming of Reynolds or the momentum of Haas, the hopes of his side rested even more heavily on his shoulders.
Just over three minutes into the game, with the Broncos on the attack, Walsh looped around behind the play, caught the ball and passed to his support, just as Taylan May charged in to cut off the movement. May hit Walsh chest to chest, trying to effect a ball and all tackle, but the ball was gone and their heads came together in a sickening collision. Walsh had to leave the field for a HIA, May was bandaged up, penalised for a late tackle and placed on report, continued the game and later avoided a charge. Walsh tried to make it back onto the field, but with a cheek full of stiches and a rapidly closing eye, there was no chance. Scans have since confirmed that he has a facial fracture and will miss several weeks.
It was only earlier this week that I suggested that defenders need to be held responsible for head clashes, just as they are in rugby union. May should have been sent off for the clash of heads and subsequently handed a suspension. It is a blatant loophole in the measures taken in recent years to protect the players' heads. No one deliberately goes into a tackle looking for a head clash, but if the punishment was there, defenders would ensure that their heads were lowered when making a tackle.
All on field interviews should be banned so that players don't have to worry about swearing
NOT REAL: One of the enhancements to sports coverage in recent years has been the ability of the broadcasters to hear from the players and coaches during the game. The NFL allows the head coaches to be interviewed on their way to the sheds at half-time to hear their perspective on how things are travelling. Some codes even have microphones on players during games, so the fans can have a greater insight into what is happening, although apart from the more gentile sports of cricket and baseball, those recordings are seldom played live.
The NRL allows players to be interviewed by the broadcaster when leaving the field at half-time, and at full-time players can be bailed up by television and radio crews for a chat. Fans want to hear from those involved, they don't need to hear the endless opinions of the commentators.
Players and coaches are grown men and women, who know that when they are in front of a live microphone, the least of their responsibilities is to hold their Ps and Qs. Inevitably with the adrenaline pumping, one will occasionally slip out, it has happened before and it will happen again. It is only when a player unleashes a tirade of bad language accompanied by an admission that they don't care, that it becomes a real issue.
Should fans be deprived of the insight that comes from these interviews or should players be reminded once again of their responsibilities and be heavily fined and reprimanded if they transgress. If a player doesn't care about the language they use when speaking to the media, they might care about the damage done to their wallet when the NRL steps in as it should.
Consistency remains the NRL's biggest officiating problem
NOT REAL: It has been said a thousand times, but all the fans really want to see from the match officials is consistency. A feeling, based on what the average fan can see with their own eyes, that the game is fair to all teams, under all circumstances.
We had a classic case in Round 2 when it came to collisions with the referee. In the Bulldogs loss to the Sharks, during a tense first half when the game was still there to be won, a clever interplay from the Bulldogs 15 metres out saw big Viliame Kikau in the clear and heading for the posts. The play was so clever that both referee Ziggy Przeklasa-Adamski and Sharks five-eighth Braydon Trindall were wrong footed on the tryline. As Trindall turned to go in the direction that the rampaging Kikau was heading, he ran into the back of the referee. Przeklasa-Adamski sent the decision upstairs to review whether or not he had interfered with the play and the bunker subsequently disallowed the try.
In Melbourne's miraculous victory over the Warriors, Storm half Jahrome Hughes was faced with a similar situation. A Warriors player was steaming towards the line, Hughes was the last defender and the referee was in his way. The only differences in the two situations were that Hughes was a bit more proactive with his solution, in that he added a shove. The Warriors player was also brought down from behind short of the line, so there was no need to rule on the referee being in the way of a try. Hughes was not penalised during the game, but banned for a week by the Match Review Committee.
Referees boss Graeme Annesley was happy enough with Hughes' ban, but thought the Bulldogs deserved a try.
"I don't believe this try should have been overturned," Annesley said. "The referee has to be somewhere on the field, he can't just disappear.
"If we allow that try to be disallowed on that basis, we'll have players making contact with the referees in multiple instances where they'll be claiming they've been disadvantaged and ask for tries to be overturned."
Whilst on Hughes he said; "It's never acceptable to push a referee".
Przeklasa-Adamski will leave his whistle in his bag this weekend and run the sideline with a flag instead. The Bulldogs went on to lose their game convincingly, but the Kickau try would have seen them lead at half-time. Annesley's explanation does nothing for the wineless Bulldogs and leaves fans wondering why one incident was worthy of a ban and the other was ruled incorrectly in favour of the offender.
If a player instigates contact with a referee, it should be play on, advantage to the other team, before the instigator is penalised and placed on report. It also would not hurt for the referees to be more aware of their surroundings and make sure they are not in the way in the first place.