April 28, 2025 • 16 mins
Catch up on all the Rugby League news from NRL 360, Monday 28th of April, with hosts Braith Anasta and Gorden Tallis.
Andrew Abdo faces the music as Braith Anasta, Gorden Tallis, James Hooper, and Brent Read challenge the NRL CEO over the massive increase in sin bins, the inconsistencies in the draw and a return of the Bears as the 18th team.
For more of the show tune in on Fox League CH 502 or stream full episodes on KAYO.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to three sixty Rubbling from every angle. Whats to
you by the new Ranger plugging highbrid Joining me the
Great Gordon Tellas. It's been the journals in buzz Rothfield
read and we have a very special guest, the CEO
of the NRL, Andrew Abdo. Thanks for joining us. It's
been a busy weekend for you, as.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
It's been a busy couple of days.
Speaker 1 (00:17):
I appreciate you coming on. What's when the NAL's driving
or approach or driving force to this crackdown with the
head eyes.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Let me first say it hasn't been a crack time
at all. There's been an policy shift. It's been the game.
It's always been illegal to tackle high, and we've been
sinbinning and penalizing high tackles for the game going back decades,
and we've been really consistent around this the last couple
of years. We're not going to apologize or take a
backwards step for protecting players from head high shots. However,
what I will say is that we've seen a couple
(00:46):
of errors. We've seen a couple of judgment calls that
perhaps weren't correct, and it was important to acknowledge that
take acountability for that, and we'll adjust and hopefully we'll
see improvements now week in the weeks of follow.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
So do you think that you got it wrong on
the weekend.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
I think there were some calls that we're wrong, and look,
and we understand some of the frustration, particularly when the
bunker intervenes in play a number of plays down the track.
We can understand why this frustration with that. The bath
of that was always intended to be quite high. It
needs to be serious or significant file play for the
bunker to intervene and to brn someone once the player
(01:20):
has moved on. That's something that we want to work
on with the referees.
Speaker 4 (01:23):
How do we get that balance between the bunker and
the referee? I think, oh, okay, if the referee does
miss it, I don't like them going back three or
four tackles only on the scoring opportunity, of course, how
do we get the balance?
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Yeah, no one likes it. I think a good example
of that is that interplay between the on field referee
and the banker is the way we work around trials.
So yeah, we back the on field referee to make
the call and it's checked in the background by the
bunker and it works really well. It's quick and they'll
only intervene if it's an obvious no try. I think
we need to think about how we empower the referees
(01:54):
on field more. Of course, we have technology, we need
to use it. But what we don't want is the
play coming back, as I've said, and I think that's
reserved for a really serious, significant foul play, and it's
probably been overused in the last couple of weeks.
Speaker 4 (02:07):
I think it was about eighteen was eighteen sin beIN.
Are we seeing more head eyes? Are other players that
ill disciplined.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
We've definitely seen an increase in head high tackles this
season so this time last year, so up to round eight,
we had about two hundred head high tackles. This year
we've had about three hum and seventy nine. So we've
seen an increase, but it's different for each team. So
some of the players and some of the teams are
adapting better than others. It's some teams that haven't had
a sin been for a headhigh tackle this season. Some
(02:36):
teams have only given away three penalties, others significantly more
than that. So there's quite a lot of inconsistency around
the way in which the players have been really disciplined
about it. Now, we understand that from time to time
there will be mitigation, and again we want to make
sure that the referees are empowered to act. They're looking
for specific things, they're looking for force, but they're also
looking for mitigation and they get those calls right. And
(02:57):
this weekend there were some errors where that mitigation wasn't applied.
And it goes both ways.
Speaker 5 (03:03):
Andrew challenge you on saying there's been a crackdown, and
I take your point that you're suggesting there's been more
head high tackles this year. I think the forty is
very similar to what it was last year. And the
bottom line is and the statistics don't lie here. Sin
bins are up one hundred and forty percent, reports are
(03:25):
up seventy five percent.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
And I hope you do understand.
Speaker 5 (03:29):
And look, I can totally understand you coming in here
defending the people who work for you, but there is
massive fan outrage out there about the officiating in the
game around the sin bennings, and people think it is
a crackdown.
Speaker 3 (03:45):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
Well, as I referred to earlier as the this is
not about me being defensivele coming here saying there's.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
Nothing, but I understand you.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Yeah, yeah, taking accountability for that. But coming back to
your stats, but what I'm saying is over a ninety
percent increase in the number of high tackles, and we're
seeing a lot of inconsistency between the clubs as well,
which means that I honestly believe there's a collective effort
that's required yet, and the accountability does sit with the game,
it does it with the officials too, but we also
(04:14):
need everyone to pull together and make sure that we
don't see a situation where we see like we saw
this weekend, a huge number of sinments. None of us
want to see penalties. None of us want to see
sin bens. None of us want to see head ye
tackles either. So there's a collective effort, yet did they Sorry?
Speaker 1 (04:29):
I think the players did it to take accountability. But
my concern is around these too, is that there were
a number of penalties on the weekend for high contact
when the players didn't even make eigh contact, which to
me suggests that the referees.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
Are really looking for it.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
They're looking to blow the penalties for high contact when,
as I said, there was at least two or three
where there really wasn't much at all, if any.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
Yeah, I'm not going to disagree with you. You know,
I've already said that I think there were a number
of errors in applying the decision tree for what constitutes
even potentially what constitutes the penalty. So we want to
support the referees make sure that they are using the
indicators as a guideline. You know, there's things to look
for in mitigation, and I think that needs to be
(05:11):
taken into account. Similarly, with level of force, we want
to make sure that it's significant level of force and
there's no mitigation before we go to burn. And I
completely agree that there were a number of calls that
should not have been a symbin equally, there were a
few calls that weren't be that probably should have been
as well. So it goes both ways, and we want
to keep getting better.
Speaker 6 (05:29):
The great concerns that Magic Ground's going to be ruined
by this. What assurances can you give the fans that
that won't happen?
Speaker 2 (05:36):
Well, I mean I can never give insurances on anything, really,
That's part of why we love professional sport, right, But
what I can say is that we have listened, I
can say that we review each and every match, each
and every round, and we've looked at some of the
errors that occurred this weekend and we want to make
sure that they don't get repeated. So I think that
what you're going to see is definitely less intervention from
(05:58):
the banker when play has moved on. Their threshold is
really high, and I think you're going to see the
referees applying mitigation more effectively.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
So is that gone now?
Speaker 1 (06:09):
They won't come into play now the bunker, Well, only
a few plays like this.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
Only if it's significant, a serious fireplay. So is that
could be anguse in my era? But I've been re
typed for twenty years like if you went to the
sin bin, you were sort of close to getting sent
off or you're going to be suspended now yeah, it's
it's yeah, I agree. And what we're saying is that
(06:34):
buy is really high. So it's going to be a
serious actor fire play, not necessarily a sendoff, but it's
going to be something that warrants play going back and
now they play meanin Andrew.
Speaker 5 (06:44):
I actually think the referees are doing a pretty good
job and they are not the problem in the game.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
I think the bunker is and.
Speaker 5 (06:52):
The inconsistency there and different venues, different games, different interpretations.
What can you do to get a higher level of consistency?
Speaker 3 (07:05):
The refs the speed.
Speaker 5 (07:06):
Of the game, and they can't make these they need
those people with the high definition screens and slow mail
to make.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
How can you improve that? Well, first of all, I
agree with you. I think the on field refs and
the referees in general do a great job. I mean,
we've had a fantastic season. Let's not lose sight of
the fact that the game, the level of football, the players,
the teams, and the referees contribute to that has been phenomenal.
We've got a game where any given day anyone can win.
The game is incredibly fast and entertaining. And I agree
(07:36):
with you, But is that the use of bunker technology?
There are ways in which we can strive for will
never get full consistency because every tackle is different, every
tackle is different, and ultimately, even though they have technologies,
they're humans making judgment calls right in real time with
a lot of pressure on them. But we can get better,
and I think more specialization that in that role of
(07:58):
using technology and better to play between the on field
and the banker and and the game providing more clarity
around their parameters for what they can and quintrule on.
So I think it's a combination of many things.
Speaker 6 (08:10):
There's a simple Andrews using less people in the bunker
and they've reduced then you use. I think it's the
four you use now in the bunker.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
Is that wrong?
Speaker 2 (08:16):
It depends on the weekend we are. We are using
less and trying to get more consistency and who is
in that role. But it's not that easy. Obviously, we've
you know, we have eight games every weekend.
Speaker 6 (08:26):
Could you have specialist bunker officials? Is that a way
you could?
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Path could potentially and the Commission, you know, to their credit,
pointed this out a while back around the need for
us to provide specialization both in terms of training support
and also the officials in there. And I think that
is the way we're heading. So we are starting to
see us using less and less officials in the bunker
to hopefully get that, you know, striving for that more
more consistent approach to how things are judicated and do.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
What's the feedback from the clubs or the coaches, is
it the speed of the game.
Speaker 2 (08:55):
Is there more fatigued? Are they frustrated with this? Well?
I think I mean everyone is frustrated by sermons because
they do impact the game. There's no we're not getting
any specific feedback, Gordy, from the clubs or the players
on any one particular element. You know, we have we
kept the rules the same this year. They've been pretty
consistent the last two or three seasons. The speed of
(09:16):
the game from year to year hasn't changed moved much.
The ball in play, elapsed time play, the ball speed
is pretty consistent year and year. But we have just
seen this this increase in head art tackles and we
hope that it's just something that will that will phase
up pretty quickly.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
How does the endal determine? This is a tough one,
the low, moderate and high force.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
Yeah, so it's a judgment call, right, but there's some
indicators there to help support the referee in making that
core particularly the referee and the banker.
Speaker 3 (09:44):
And what you're looking.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
For is you're looking for things like the speed of
the defender, the speed of the attacker. You're looking for
head movement, and we're blash, you're looking for a player
launching forward or perhaps being off both feet. All of
these indicators. There are tools available to help ultimately make
a judgment, call under pressure at speed and make a
determination foul play.
Speaker 5 (10:05):
And there was another incident on the weekend. Topreneur Bulldogs
lifted his knee and attack. Terrible incident. Lucky who didn't
break a jaw. He gets two weeks the match review
committee grade. He gets two weeks, So I think that's insufficient.
I'm wondering if harsher panelies match review or judiciary would
be a bigger deterrent.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
You're saying this a record number of high tackles.
Speaker 5 (10:27):
For coaches to emphasize more to their players, you've got
to redirect your heads. And if they're facing a month
on the they used to in the old days when
there was a problem.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Yeah, I mean it is. You would think, you know,
time out of the game, losing a play in a game,
losing a player for a number of weeks afterwards is
a big deterrence. But we're talking earlier about this, and
I want to reemphasize that some of the players and
some of the teams are doing this really well, have
adapted incredibly well, and have very very low coalds of symboms.
Some teams haven't had any yet. Some teams have had
(11:02):
very very low levels of penalties for high tackles. So
we've seen some teams adapt and be a lot more disciplined,
and I think that they will be at a significant
advantage because again, while you know, we're not going to
take a backward step one player safety, we can get
better in eliminating some of these errors, and we want
to make sure that we catch all the important ones.
(11:22):
But ultimately the teams that adapt are going to do
better over the course of the season.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Andrew Symbin's the solution even you said that it is
hurt in the game and the spectacle to it. Agree,
should we leave it more to the MRC or is
there a different solutions?
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Look, there's always there's always ways in which we can
think about getting better and finding different solutions, and that
will happen. We do this at the end of every season,
where we obviously consult with everyone in the game and
those that have great experience to contribute to ways in
which we can come up with solutions. But you know,
I think any contact sport has to have accountability in
the game for various file play and losing a player.
(12:02):
I don't see our sport moving away from the impact
of that. Take for instance, we're talking a lot about
a player who's been but what about the player who's
hit high illegally gets taken off for the head injury assessment,
is out of the game for fifteen minutes, That team
has lost that player. I think there needs to be
a counterbalance and a disincentive to file play. So it's
(12:23):
not getting that by right of.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
Course, And the responsibility is for the player and the
coaches as well. So what accountability do they need to
take and.
Speaker 3 (12:30):
Do they need to work harder on what they do?
Speaker 2 (12:32):
I think it's a collective effort. I mean, I think
we obviously need to do our bit to make sure
that this clarity, and the referees to make sure that
they're applying it consistently, and the communication, the feedback back
to the teams, the clubs and the players. It's a
collective effort. And you know, ultimately, we don't really want
to be talking about this. We don't when you're talking
about officials and we're talking about administrators. We're talking about
the footy, and again we've had some unbelievable games, and
(12:54):
I think we're going to have a cracking weekend.
Speaker 5 (12:56):
So this morning, Andrew las Vegas for you Freemont Street. Yeah, well,
you know, I identified a few issues that needed to
be addressed, I thought, but it just seemed so long ago.
And I hate seeing or getting so many text messages
over the weekend from disgruntled fans. And I hated listening
(13:21):
to Joey John's yesterday and Immortal of the game speaking
the manner in which he did, And I really really
do hate you can fix it the magic we can.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
I just say that we get it, like we know,
we're not tone deaf, and we understand the frustration, and
we'll continue to work on it. My point is just
it's a it's a collective accountability and safety is important.
Speaker 6 (13:41):
If d Wayne had an idea in the I think
it was wayn Bennett's idea in the preseason where if
you hit someone high the player with wife for hi,
I think if they stayed off, then the player committed
the act. Then I have to go on the sin bin.
Why wasn't that that was trialed? I think of the preseason?
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Is that right?
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Yeah, we to try the preseason. That'll be reviewed and
looked at it at the end of this season. You know,
there's there's pros and coins to any system Brent like,
And I suppose one of the things is that we
need to consider is not all tackles result in an injury.
It's more about the risk of the injury. Sometimes you
can get lucky, and you can have a terrible actor
file play and the player just gets up and is unscathed.
(14:19):
Sometimes it's a fairly innocious thing. So I think it's
more about the risk of injury than the actual injury.
But you know, I understand that we need to think
about different ways of taking this problem before we let
the CEO go.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
You two have got anything else for.
Speaker 5 (14:37):
I'd like to ask about the playing schedule. I don't
think it's fair for a number of reasons. And I
said this Wrning six clubs don't have any five day turnarounds.
Corral and Bridsbane have three rehab after forty games. Is
so important, and you know you can get a longer break,
(14:58):
you get an advantage. And I don't cop these double
up games. So many double ups in the first ten weeks,
that's all I've got to winch about.
Speaker 2 (15:07):
So it's a fair like it's a fair comment. A
couple of things. One is the draw in the schedule
is one of the most complex things that we do.
And one number two, yeah, it's not created equal for everyone.
Certainly some teams travel more than others. The five day turnarounds.
The stadium availability also importantly buzz and sometimes the fans
(15:29):
don't realize that we're also working hard to provide, for example,
Saturday afternoon forty or Sunday afternoon forty for teams, so
they're not just playing on Thursday nights or Friday nights.
So there's a range of factors in there. But what
I will say is we do need to get better
at it. With the advent of artificial intelligence and technology,
I think we're going to see improvements going forward. And
I think expansion and moving to eighteen teams and beyond
(15:52):
provides us an opportunity to look at the season structure
differently in apps perhaps be able to tackle the fixtureless
in a better way than we've done in previous years.
Speaker 6 (16:02):
You mentioned expansion, I've got to ask you about Perth,
the Perth Bears or for Wa Bears. What are they
going to be called?
Speaker 2 (16:08):
When do you think you be in positioned to.
Speaker 6 (16:09):
Announce that formally announced something.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
I don't know when we'll be we'll be in a
position to finalize it and have a formula on us,
but it is exciting that we are talking about expansion
and clearly Western Australia is a great market for us.
You know, when the Western reads were firing, we had
fifteen sixteen thousand REGIS participants, So it's a great opportunity
for us in terms of a national bluebrind very exciting
(16:31):
opportunity and hopefully we were able to finalize something that
adds a lot of dage the game. The business case
stacks up and we're certainly heading in the right direction.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
Well, Andrew, we really appreciate you coming in.
Speaker 1 (16:42):
You shown great leadership again, taking this head on and
coming in face to face, giving us great clarification on.
Speaker 3 (16:49):
A number of issues in our game. So we appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
No problem, Thank you, all right, and you played buzz
off for a break too.
Welcome to three sixty Rubbling from every angle. Whats to
you by the new Ranger plugging highbrid Joining me the
Great Gordon Tellas. It's been the journals in buzz Rothfield
read and we have a very special guest, the CEO
of the NRL, Andrew Abdo. Thanks for joining us. It's
been a busy weekend for you, as.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
It's been a busy couple of days.
Speaker 1 (00:17):
I appreciate you coming on. What's when the NAL's driving
or approach or driving force to this crackdown with the
head eyes.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Let me first say it hasn't been a crack time
at all. There's been an policy shift. It's been the game.
It's always been illegal to tackle high, and we've been
sinbinning and penalizing high tackles for the game going back decades,
and we've been really consistent around this the last couple
of years. We're not going to apologize or take a
backwards step for protecting players from head high shots. However,
what I will say is that we've seen a couple
(00:46):
of errors. We've seen a couple of judgment calls that
perhaps weren't correct, and it was important to acknowledge that
take acountability for that, and we'll adjust and hopefully we'll
see improvements now week in the weeks of follow.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
So do you think that you got it wrong on
the weekend.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
I think there were some calls that we're wrong, and look,
and we understand some of the frustration, particularly when the
bunker intervenes in play a number of plays down the track.
We can understand why this frustration with that. The bath
of that was always intended to be quite high. It
needs to be serious or significant file play for the
bunker to intervene and to brn someone once the player
(01:20):
has moved on. That's something that we want to work
on with the referees.
Speaker 4 (01:23):
How do we get that balance between the bunker and
the referee? I think, oh, okay, if the referee does
miss it, I don't like them going back three or
four tackles only on the scoring opportunity, of course, how
do we get the balance?
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Yeah, no one likes it. I think a good example
of that is that interplay between the on field referee
and the banker is the way we work around trials.
So yeah, we back the on field referee to make
the call and it's checked in the background by the
bunker and it works really well. It's quick and they'll
only intervene if it's an obvious no try. I think
we need to think about how we empower the referees
(01:54):
on field more. Of course, we have technology, we need
to use it. But what we don't want is the
play coming back, as I've said, and I think that's
reserved for a really serious, significant foul play, and it's
probably been overused in the last couple of weeks.
Speaker 4 (02:07):
I think it was about eighteen was eighteen sin beIN.
Are we seeing more head eyes? Are other players that
ill disciplined.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
We've definitely seen an increase in head high tackles this
season so this time last year, so up to round eight,
we had about two hundred head high tackles. This year
we've had about three hum and seventy nine. So we've
seen an increase, but it's different for each team. So
some of the players and some of the teams are
adapting better than others. It's some teams that haven't had
a sin been for a headhigh tackle this season. Some
(02:36):
teams have only given away three penalties, others significantly more
than that. So there's quite a lot of inconsistency around
the way in which the players have been really disciplined
about it. Now, we understand that from time to time
there will be mitigation, and again we want to make
sure that the referees are empowered to act. They're looking
for specific things, they're looking for force, but they're also
looking for mitigation and they get those calls right. And
(02:57):
this weekend there were some errors where that mitigation wasn't applied.
And it goes both ways.
Speaker 5 (03:03):
Andrew challenge you on saying there's been a crackdown, and
I take your point that you're suggesting there's been more
head high tackles this year. I think the forty is
very similar to what it was last year. And the
bottom line is and the statistics don't lie here. Sin
bins are up one hundred and forty percent, reports are
(03:25):
up seventy five percent.
Speaker 3 (03:27):
And I hope you do understand.
Speaker 5 (03:29):
And look, I can totally understand you coming in here
defending the people who work for you, but there is
massive fan outrage out there about the officiating in the
game around the sin bennings, and people think it is
a crackdown.
Speaker 3 (03:45):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
Well, as I referred to earlier as the this is
not about me being defensivele coming here saying there's.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
Nothing, but I understand you.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Yeah, yeah, taking accountability for that. But coming back to
your stats, but what I'm saying is over a ninety
percent increase in the number of high tackles, and we're
seeing a lot of inconsistency between the clubs as well,
which means that I honestly believe there's a collective effort
that's required yet, and the accountability does sit with the game,
it does it with the officials too, but we also
(04:14):
need everyone to pull together and make sure that we
don't see a situation where we see like we saw
this weekend, a huge number of sinments. None of us
want to see penalties. None of us want to see
sin bens. None of us want to see head ye
tackles either. So there's a collective effort, yet did they Sorry?
Speaker 1 (04:29):
I think the players did it to take accountability. But
my concern is around these too, is that there were
a number of penalties on the weekend for high contact
when the players didn't even make eigh contact, which to
me suggests that the referees.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
Are really looking for it.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
They're looking to blow the penalties for high contact when,
as I said, there was at least two or three
where there really wasn't much at all, if any.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
Yeah, I'm not going to disagree with you. You know,
I've already said that I think there were a number
of errors in applying the decision tree for what constitutes
even potentially what constitutes the penalty. So we want to
support the referees make sure that they are using the
indicators as a guideline. You know, there's things to look
for in mitigation, and I think that needs to be
(05:11):
taken into account. Similarly, with level of force, we want
to make sure that it's significant level of force and
there's no mitigation before we go to burn. And I
completely agree that there were a number of calls that
should not have been a symbin equally, there were a
few calls that weren't be that probably should have been
as well. So it goes both ways, and we want
to keep getting better.
Speaker 6 (05:29):
The great concerns that Magic Ground's going to be ruined
by this. What assurances can you give the fans that
that won't happen?
Speaker 2 (05:36):
Well, I mean I can never give insurances on anything, really,
That's part of why we love professional sport, right, But
what I can say is that we have listened, I
can say that we review each and every match, each
and every round, and we've looked at some of the
errors that occurred this weekend and we want to make
sure that they don't get repeated. So I think that
what you're going to see is definitely less intervention from
(05:58):
the banker when play has moved on. Their threshold is
really high, and I think you're going to see the
referees applying mitigation more effectively.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
So is that gone now?
Speaker 1 (06:09):
They won't come into play now the bunker, Well, only
a few plays like this.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
Only if it's significant, a serious fireplay. So is that
could be anguse in my era? But I've been re
typed for twenty years like if you went to the
sin bin, you were sort of close to getting sent
off or you're going to be suspended now yeah, it's
it's yeah, I agree. And what we're saying is that
(06:34):
buy is really high. So it's going to be a
serious actor fire play, not necessarily a sendoff, but it's
going to be something that warrants play going back and
now they play meanin Andrew.
Speaker 5 (06:44):
I actually think the referees are doing a pretty good
job and they are not the problem in the game.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
I think the bunker is and.
Speaker 5 (06:52):
The inconsistency there and different venues, different games, different interpretations.
What can you do to get a higher level of consistency?
Speaker 3 (07:05):
The refs the speed.
Speaker 5 (07:06):
Of the game, and they can't make these they need
those people with the high definition screens and slow mail
to make.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
How can you improve that? Well, first of all, I
agree with you. I think the on field refs and
the referees in general do a great job. I mean,
we've had a fantastic season. Let's not lose sight of
the fact that the game, the level of football, the players,
the teams, and the referees contribute to that has been phenomenal.
We've got a game where any given day anyone can win.
The game is incredibly fast and entertaining. And I agree
(07:36):
with you, But is that the use of bunker technology?
There are ways in which we can strive for will
never get full consistency because every tackle is different, every
tackle is different, and ultimately, even though they have technologies,
they're humans making judgment calls right in real time with
a lot of pressure on them. But we can get better,
and I think more specialization that in that role of
(07:58):
using technology and better to play between the on field
and the banker and and the game providing more clarity
around their parameters for what they can and quintrule on.
So I think it's a combination of many things.
Speaker 6 (08:10):
There's a simple Andrews using less people in the bunker
and they've reduced then you use. I think it's the
four you use now in the bunker.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
Is that wrong?
Speaker 2 (08:16):
It depends on the weekend we are. We are using
less and trying to get more consistency and who is
in that role. But it's not that easy. Obviously, we've
you know, we have eight games every weekend.
Speaker 6 (08:26):
Could you have specialist bunker officials? Is that a way
you could?
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Path could potentially and the Commission, you know, to their credit,
pointed this out a while back around the need for
us to provide specialization both in terms of training support
and also the officials in there. And I think that
is the way we're heading. So we are starting to
see us using less and less officials in the bunker
to hopefully get that, you know, striving for that more
more consistent approach to how things are judicated and do.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
What's the feedback from the clubs or the coaches, is
it the speed of the game.
Speaker 2 (08:55):
Is there more fatigued? Are they frustrated with this? Well?
I think I mean everyone is frustrated by sermons because
they do impact the game. There's no we're not getting
any specific feedback, Gordy, from the clubs or the players
on any one particular element. You know, we have we
kept the rules the same this year. They've been pretty
consistent the last two or three seasons. The speed of
(09:16):
the game from year to year hasn't changed moved much.
The ball in play, elapsed time play, the ball speed
is pretty consistent year and year. But we have just
seen this this increase in head art tackles and we
hope that it's just something that will that will phase
up pretty quickly.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
How does the endal determine? This is a tough one,
the low, moderate and high force.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
Yeah, so it's a judgment call, right, but there's some
indicators there to help support the referee in making that
core particularly the referee and the banker.
Speaker 3 (09:44):
And what you're looking.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
For is you're looking for things like the speed of
the defender, the speed of the attacker. You're looking for
head movement, and we're blash, you're looking for a player
launching forward or perhaps being off both feet. All of
these indicators. There are tools available to help ultimately make
a judgment, call under pressure at speed and make a
determination foul play.
Speaker 5 (10:05):
And there was another incident on the weekend. Topreneur Bulldogs
lifted his knee and attack. Terrible incident. Lucky who didn't
break a jaw. He gets two weeks the match review
committee grade. He gets two weeks, So I think that's insufficient.
I'm wondering if harsher panelies match review or judiciary would
be a bigger deterrent.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
You're saying this a record number of high tackles.
Speaker 5 (10:27):
For coaches to emphasize more to their players, you've got
to redirect your heads. And if they're facing a month
on the they used to in the old days when
there was a problem.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
Yeah, I mean it is. You would think, you know,
time out of the game, losing a play in a game,
losing a player for a number of weeks afterwards is
a big deterrence. But we're talking earlier about this, and
I want to reemphasize that some of the players and
some of the teams are doing this really well, have
adapted incredibly well, and have very very low coalds of symboms.
Some teams haven't had any yet. Some teams have had
(11:02):
very very low levels of penalties for high tackles. So
we've seen some teams adapt and be a lot more disciplined,
and I think that they will be at a significant
advantage because again, while you know, we're not going to
take a backward step one player safety, we can get
better in eliminating some of these errors, and we want
to make sure that we catch all the important ones.
(11:22):
But ultimately the teams that adapt are going to do
better over the course of the season.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
Andrew Symbin's the solution even you said that it is
hurt in the game and the spectacle to it. Agree,
should we leave it more to the MRC or is
there a different solutions?
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Look, there's always there's always ways in which we can
think about getting better and finding different solutions, and that
will happen. We do this at the end of every season,
where we obviously consult with everyone in the game and
those that have great experience to contribute to ways in
which we can come up with solutions. But you know,
I think any contact sport has to have accountability in
the game for various file play and losing a player.
(12:02):
I don't see our sport moving away from the impact
of that. Take for instance, we're talking a lot about
a player who's been but what about the player who's
hit high illegally gets taken off for the head injury assessment,
is out of the game for fifteen minutes, That team
has lost that player. I think there needs to be
a counterbalance and a disincentive to file play. So it's
(12:23):
not getting that by right of.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
Course, And the responsibility is for the player and the
coaches as well. So what accountability do they need to
take and.
Speaker 3 (12:30):
Do they need to work harder on what they do?
Speaker 2 (12:32):
I think it's a collective effort. I mean, I think
we obviously need to do our bit to make sure
that this clarity, and the referees to make sure that
they're applying it consistently, and the communication, the feedback back
to the teams, the clubs and the players. It's a
collective effort. And you know, ultimately, we don't really want
to be talking about this. We don't when you're talking
about officials and we're talking about administrators. We're talking about
the footy, and again we've had some unbelievable games, and
(12:54):
I think we're going to have a cracking weekend.
Speaker 5 (12:56):
So this morning, Andrew las Vegas for you Freemont Street. Yeah, well,
you know, I identified a few issues that needed to
be addressed, I thought, but it just seemed so long ago.
And I hate seeing or getting so many text messages
over the weekend from disgruntled fans. And I hated listening
(13:21):
to Joey John's yesterday and Immortal of the game speaking
the manner in which he did, And I really really
do hate you can fix it the magic we can.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
I just say that we get it, like we know,
we're not tone deaf, and we understand the frustration, and
we'll continue to work on it. My point is just
it's a it's a collective accountability and safety is important.
Speaker 6 (13:41):
If d Wayne had an idea in the I think
it was wayn Bennett's idea in the preseason where if
you hit someone high the player with wife for hi,
I think if they stayed off, then the player committed
the act. Then I have to go on the sin bin.
Why wasn't that that was trialed? I think of the preseason?
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Is that right?
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Yeah, we to try the preseason. That'll be reviewed and
looked at it at the end of this season. You know,
there's there's pros and coins to any system Brent like,
And I suppose one of the things is that we
need to consider is not all tackles result in an injury.
It's more about the risk of the injury. Sometimes you
can get lucky, and you can have a terrible actor
file play and the player just gets up and is unscathed.
(14:19):
Sometimes it's a fairly innocious thing. So I think it's
more about the risk of injury than the actual injury.
But you know, I understand that we need to think
about different ways of taking this problem before we let
the CEO go.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
You two have got anything else for.
Speaker 5 (14:37):
I'd like to ask about the playing schedule. I don't
think it's fair for a number of reasons. And I
said this Wrning six clubs don't have any five day turnarounds.
Corral and Bridsbane have three rehab after forty games. Is
so important, and you know you can get a longer break,
(14:58):
you get an advantage. And I don't cop these double
up games. So many double ups in the first ten weeks,
that's all I've got to winch about.
Speaker 2 (15:07):
So it's a fair like it's a fair comment. A
couple of things. One is the draw in the schedule
is one of the most complex things that we do.
And one number two, yeah, it's not created equal for everyone.
Certainly some teams travel more than others. The five day turnarounds.
The stadium availability also importantly buzz and sometimes the fans
(15:29):
don't realize that we're also working hard to provide, for example,
Saturday afternoon forty or Sunday afternoon forty for teams, so
they're not just playing on Thursday nights or Friday nights.
So there's a range of factors in there. But what
I will say is we do need to get better
at it. With the advent of artificial intelligence and technology,
I think we're going to see improvements going forward. And
I think expansion and moving to eighteen teams and beyond
(15:52):
provides us an opportunity to look at the season structure
differently in apps perhaps be able to tackle the fixtureless
in a better way than we've done in previous years.
Speaker 6 (16:02):
You mentioned expansion, I've got to ask you about Perth,
the Perth Bears or for Wa Bears. What are they
going to be called?
Speaker 2 (16:08):
When do you think you be in positioned to.
Speaker 6 (16:09):
Announce that formally announced something.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
I don't know when we'll be we'll be in a
position to finalize it and have a formula on us,
but it is exciting that we are talking about expansion
and clearly Western Australia is a great market for us.
You know, when the Western reads were firing, we had
fifteen sixteen thousand REGIS participants, So it's a great opportunity
for us in terms of a national bluebrind very exciting
(16:31):
opportunity and hopefully we were able to finalize something that
adds a lot of dage the game. The business case
stacks up and we're certainly heading in the right direction.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
Well, Andrew, we really appreciate you coming in.
Speaker 1 (16:42):
You shown great leadership again, taking this head on and
coming in face to face, giving us great clarification on.
Speaker 3 (16:49):
A number of issues in our game. So we appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
No problem, Thank you, all right, and you played buzz
off for a break too.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com