THERE are straight answers and then there is Nathan Cleary’s response as to whether he expected his son to be suspended for coming into contact with kicker Hugo Savala’s leg during Sunday’s finals series clash.
“God no. Of course not….” Cleary senior said following Penrith’s 19-12 win over Sydney Roosters, during which Nathan Cleary spent 10 minutes in the sin bin for the offence.
“He’s just trying to make a play so he’s probably thinking the right thing there.
“But the angle’s wrong and under the current rules … it is what it is.
“He was obviously disappointed. He was thinking the right thing, trying to make play at that point.
“But he did the same thing to (Matt Burton) last year against the Dogs. Burton’s a left footer so it was a different angle. He just got the wrong angle.
“It’s just one of those rules that’s come in over the last couple of years that sometimes you forget about in the heat of battle.
“Hugo’s not injured and I don’t think it was meant. It’s just a black and white thing that we’ve brought into the game.”
Ivan then followed up his defence of Nathan with and counter argument.
“I must say, the same thing happened to him down near the goalposts earlier the game so .. yeah, anyway.”
Does he wish there was more consistency from the match officials? “Of course you do but there’s nothing I can do about that.”
Nathan pulled up lame with a foot injury, suffered before he kicked a late field goal. “There’s something wrong,” Ivan said.
“I don’t know what it is. No-one has looked at it yet.”
Across the hall, Roosters boss Trent Robinson also picked an unconventional time to mention officiating inconsistencies – when he was asked about Savala being denied a try for a double movement.
“Yes, a double movement definitely but there were high shots from people falling constantly,” Robinson said.
“He got hit and crushered on the back of the neck constantly. I don’t understand, probably, that one. The double movement definitely – he hit and he did reach out but contact to the head in that position, there was quite a few against us tonight.
“The one on (Tom) Jenkins on Billy (Smith)’s knees and then the one and then we had two sliding ones so I think in the context of the game, I think that was a penalty in front.
“An incidental crusher is still a crusher. That’s not words that I’ve heard. I think incidental contact … but that doesn’t matter if you crusher someone.”
