There's rules, that are applied strictly for such behaviour as Shai encroaching on the 9m or Shai showing dissent (to a clearly incorrect free).
Then there's instances of rules where you can relax your interpretations for things such as "accidents" (see Prestia example) or where you can choose to apply "common sense" - such as in the Sydney game last year when they booted the ball away before the full-time siren.
Or choosing not to use the "umpires call" rule despite there being no clear evidence to overturn it.
And don't forget when they pinged Houli for HTB a few years ago when he marked a touched ball but did not hear the umpires call of touched. Usually they apply common sense and ball it up, but in Houli's case they applied the strict interpreatation and pinged him because he didnt attempt to dispose of it. I'm yet to see that same application in any other game.
Perhaps they can call these quirks The Tiger Interpretations as they often seem to occur in our games?
