Neil Robertson Quotes

I play the game as honestly as I can. If the referee gives a penalty there is nothing you can do.

The trouble with referees is that they know the rules, but they do not know the game.

I always hated to throw a guy out of a game but sometimes it was necessary to keep order.

If the rules aren't going to protect the integrity of the game, then they're wrong.

Freedom of movement, which is a great rule, doesn't mean freedom to go to the rim for a layup or freedom to take any shot you want to take or me going in there and not playing through contact.

It's a different era. I understand what Charles Barkley was saying but you just can't take guys out. There's too much scrutiny. There's too many replays and reviews, and cameras everywhere.

Don't ever have a rule that you won't enforce with your best player.

Most players in this league say they want consistency.

Your job is to umpire for the ball and not the player.

I myself am frustrated in just where sports are at. It's a hard thing when you're out there working every day, and you know that someone else is cheating and they may not necessarily get caught.

As all of us with any involvement in sports knows, no two umpires or no two referees have the same strike zone or call the same kind of a basketball game.

The reason I am here, they tell me, is that I played the game a certain way, that I played the game the way it was supposed to be played.

When I play, I don't cheat. I played for 490,000 in Berlin, and I'll play just as hard for 100.

After my 10-match ban in 2013 for biting Branislav Ivanovic, I had questioned the double standards and how the fact that no one actually gets hurt is never taken into consideration.

The message here is you cannot, under any circumstances, throw an object at an official. You just cannot do it.

Judges are like umpires. Umpires don't make the rules ; they apply them. The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules. But it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a bail game to see the umpire.

I couldn't identify just one, but there's numerous rule changes and points of emphasis that have reflected a change on the field almost immediately. It's hard to avoid the horse-collar tackle, for example, but the players understand why the rule is in there - because of the injury rate prior to us making that a personal foul.

Children's games constitute the most admirable social institutions. The game of marbles, for instance, as played by boys, contains an extremely complex system of rules - that is to say, a code of laws, a jurisprudence of its own.

The way we score is complicated. The rules are strict. The goal on the court is to show nothing, and then when you show something you are a bad person. Getting angry is not allowed. The show that you see on TV is not exciting, like the NFL or NBA, because you are seeing robots.

Some referees have to think about treating every player the same, even if it's Ronaldinho or another player from a Premiership club. It doesn't matter how good you are: you have to be treated the same.

If you ask any referee before the game - they ask me if I have anything to say, I tell them 'I'm going straight up.' Every time. Every game. And they know that and they say I'm one of the best at it.

You can't put your arm around the referee! That's ungentlemanly conduct.

We went for 50-something years and never had a system to fine anybody for disparaging remarks in the sport. We're the only sport on the planet that had that. So we simply in the last couple of years changed that policy because we thought we needed to.

I know the International Cricket Council are very strict about what you are allowed to do and what looks good on TV, but you can't let that take away from your natural game.

The rules of the game really have given the offense an advantage, especially with pass interference.