EXCLUSIVE: Billy Slater warns referees against 'dangerous territory' amid Harry Grant milking furore

NRL legend Billy Slater says referees should not try to judge the intent of a player when deciding if an incident is illegal or not.

It comes in the wake of several controversial decisions in round 24, the most high profile being Harry Grant's milking of a penalty to effectively rob Penrith of victory on Thursday night.

Grant ran from marker straight at Panthers player Moses Leota and deliberately made contact, forcing the referee and Bunker to penalise Penrith and scratch off a Nathan Cleary field goal that would have likely ended the game.

READ MORE: Saints star inks new deal to become AFL's first $2m man

READ MORE: Trbojevic's future clouded after tough Manly call

READ MORE: 'Too early' for Piastri to play it safe in title fight

Grant then scored the winning try in golden point a few minutes later, leaving Cleary and the Panthers fuming.

The Storm hooker has been equal parts praised and criticised for the act, which some call milking but others argue is simply being clever to achieve a result.

He is hardly the only player in the game manipulating the rules to gain an advantage. Only a week earlier Eels halfback Mitchell Moses took a dive to rob the Cowboys of a game-winning try.

Melbourne legend Slater says referees must officiate games based on the rule book, and not be asked to judge a player's intent.

Watch the 2025 NRL premiership live and free on Nine and 9Now.

"Moses Leota was in an illegal position and Harry played up to it, he obviously played for the penalty," he told Nine's The Billy Slater Podcast.

"There's two lines of thinking here; was it a penalty? Yes, you can't stand there. It is an illegal play, and those rules have been enforced over the last two years.

"If you want to argue if you don't like the actions of Harry Grant, that is a totally different story.

"If you're going to start refereeing the game on whether you like the actions of players, and what intention the players have, you are starting to get into dangerous territory.

"There were a couple of incidents over the weekend with some tries that were awarded that looked like obvious obstructions to me. There was one in the Warriors game and there was one in the Cowboys game.

"Because referees are starting to think about the intentions of players, rather than just refereeing the game on the rules, they are starting to get clouded and we are starting to get inconsistencies with these rulings.

"The rules are the rules. Referee the rules and forget about the player's intentions and the game will flow a lot easier, we won't get these grey areas in these conversations."

Obstruction decisions in try-scoring situations are often scrutinised over whether the defending player deliberately makes contact with a decoy runner.

The Warriors were trailing the Dragons on Friday night until they were awarded a controversial try, despite what looked like an obstruction in the lead-up.

If the Bunker official judges a defender to have deliberately made contact with the decoy runner, the try is often awarded.

Slater says that shouldn't be the case.

"It was a blatant obstruction - black and white obstruction, don't even look at it twice," he said of Friday's incident.

"Did (the Dragons defender) play it up a little bit? Yeah, of course he did, but don't worry about that. Just worry about the rules and was he impeded... yes he was, obstruction.

"That's why I don't like referees saying 'oh, you're milking' - no he's not, he's trying to play the ball fast and playing to the rules.

"You don't need to say 'he's milking, he's milking', that is disrespectful to the player. They've got to stay right where their lane is and referee the rules.

"It's a quick fix for me, it's pretty obvious. But whether it gets sorted out before the finals is another story."