2018 Rd 15 V Tigers: Game Day

[dubby]

What was the crowd figure? Campbelltown's crowds never look that big to me.

Maybe 6000

[The Greenhouse]

FULL TIME

Canberra Raiders 48
Wests Tigers 12

[1992]

If Benji was playing would we lose?

[reptar]

Hodgson did cause an accidental obstruction, which is still a penalty in the rules. Just unusual to see that called.

[Johno]

"A nice play again by Aidan Sezer" says the Fox commentators, correctly...

Hes crap !

[Botman]

That’s garbage

The rule? Yeah i think it is a bit garbage.
But given it IS the rule, they got it 100% right.

Bull. Show me

Haha why bother? You'd just argue the toss anyways.
The bunker offical just confirmed as much too, Croker is cleared of an obstruction because he's "behind the ball"

Hodgson was infront of the ball carrier, if he impedes a defender and the attacking team benefits, it's a mandatory penalty. Simple, Gangers. Sort it out.

Surely he’s allowed to be in front at a kickoff. He was not run behind, he was run beside and the defender had chosen to be in the wrong place. It’s WRONG.

Can’t believe you’re citing this video ref as your justification. He’s a **** clown with no idea!

Im just telling you the **** rules mate. Possession is established, he's in front of the ball carrier and impeded a defender. It's **** luck, and a rule that needs tweaking but it's mandatory. What you do with that information is up to you, Gangers

Im off to enjoy a rare win with a few bevys

[Ultima]

Thank **** a decent win! 60 minutes of great footy.

[edwahu]

Can we play the Tigers every week? Great second half after a slow start.

[dubby]

That Twahl is a ****

[gangrenous]

The rule? Yeah i think it is a bit garbage.
But given it IS the rule, they got it 100% right.

Bull. Show me

Haha why bother? You'd just argue the toss anyways.
The bunker offical just confirmed as much too, Croker is cleared of an obstruction because he's "behind the ball"

Hodgson was infront of the ball carrier, if he impedes a defender and the attacking team benefits, it's a mandatory penalty. Simple, Gangers. Sort it out.

Surely he’s allowed to be in front at a kickoff. He was not run behind, he was run beside and the defender had chosen to be in the wrong place. It’s WRONG.

Can’t believe you’re citing this video ref as your justification. He’s a **** clown with no idea!

Im just telling you the **** rules mate. Possession is established, he's in front of the ball carrier and impeded a defender. It's **** luck, and a rule that needs tweaking but it's mandatory. What you do with that information is up to you, Gangers

Im off to enjoy a rare win with a few bevys

By that logic FPN was actually impeded as he ran to tackle the player and a player in front standing his ground obstructed him.

[CJ42]

How goods that feel!?

[raiderskater]

Now that was more like it.

Just as long as we don't rest on our laurels.

[Schifty]

Who would have thought completing your sets would be you have more energy in the last 10 minutes and don't fall into a complete heap. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[1992]

Poor D in the first half.

[Billy Walker]

Lots to like, still plenty to work on but a nice way to end the weekend and makes things interesting... the 8 has to be a better chance that it was this time last week.

[Botman]

Bull. Show me

Haha why bother? You'd just argue the toss anyways.
The bunker offical just confirmed as much too, Croker is cleared of an obstruction because he's "behind the ball"

Hodgson was infront of the ball carrier, if he impedes a defender and the attacking team benefits, it's a mandatory penalty. Simple, Gangers. Sort it out.

Surely he’s allowed to be in front at a kickoff. He was not run behind, he was run beside and the defender had chosen to be in the wrong place. It’s WRONG.

Can’t believe you’re citing this video ref as your justification. He’s a **** clown with no idea!

Im just telling you the **** rules mate. Possession is established, he's in front of the ball carrier and impeded a defender. It's **** luck, and a rule that needs tweaking but it's mandatory. What you do with that information is up to you, Gangers

Im off to enjoy a rare win with a few bevys

By that logic FPN was actually impeded as he ran to tackle the player and a player in front standing his ground obstructed him.

Aside from being many years ago the the interpretations and rules of obstructions have changed in that time, FPN also moved deliberately off his line to lay a shot on James for no reason. That's a 2 strike count now, Gangers.
3 and you're out

[Botman]

Bull. Show me

Haha why bother? You'd just argue the toss anyways.
The bunker offical just confirmed as much too, Croker is cleared of an obstruction because he's "behind the ball"

Hodgson was infront of the ball carrier, if he impedes a defender and the attacking team benefits, it's a mandatory penalty. Simple, Gangers. Sort it out.

Surely he’s allowed to be in front at a kickoff. He was not run behind, he was run beside and the defender had chosen to be in the wrong place. It’s WRONG.

Can’t believe you’re citing this video ref as your justification. He’s a **** clown with no idea!

Im just telling you the **** rules mate. Possession is established, he's in front of the ball carrier and impeded a defender. It's **** luck, and a rule that needs tweaking but it's mandatory. What you do with that information is up to you, Gangers

Im off to enjoy a rare win with a few bevys

By that logic FPN was actually impeded as he ran to tackle the player and a player in front standing his ground obstructed him.

Aside from being many years ago the the interpretations and rules of obstructions have changed in that time, FPN also moved deliberately off his line to lay a shot on James for no reason. That's a 2 strike count now, Gangers.
3 and you're out

[dubby]

Poor D in the first half.

Yup. The Broncos will kill us next week.

But for now, I'm enjoying the win.

[LP Raider]

Really hard to gauge after that game but really impressed with Liam Knight, looks like someone with a smart footy brain.

[dubby]

Hodgson should never have been penalised.
What's he meant to do? Disappear into thin air?

Taylor milked it for everything possible and got away with it.

And everyone, except incompetent ref, a box and a Nick standing on it, agrees.

[Roger Kenworthy]

Great win. Is it coincidence the Raiders members email went out as soon as the match finished? Haha.

[Timbo]

Guys, I think there may be something to this Josh Hodgson fella.

[1992]

A win next week and we are knocking on the door.

We are not contenders but it would be nice to make the finals anyway.

[gangrenous]

Haha why bother? You'd just argue the toss anyways.
The bunker offical just confirmed as much too, Croker is cleared of an obstruction because he's "behind the ball"

Hodgson was infront of the ball carrier, if he impedes a defender and the attacking team benefits, it's a mandatory penalty. Simple, Gangers. Sort it out.

Surely he’s allowed to be in front at a kickoff. He was not run behind, he was run beside and the defender had chosen to be in the wrong place. It’s WRONG.

Can’t believe you’re citing this video ref as your justification. He’s a **** clown with no idea!

Im just telling you the **** rules mate. Possession is established, he's in front of the ball carrier and impeded a defender. It's **** luck, and a rule that needs tweaking but it's mandatory. What you do with that information is up to you, Gangers

Im off to enjoy a rare win with a few bevys

By that logic FPN was actually impeded as he ran to tackle the player and a player in front standing his ground obstructed him.

Aside from being many years ago the the interpretations and rules of obstructions have changed in that time, FPN also moved deliberately off his line to lay a shot on James for no reason. That's a 2 strike count now, Gangers.
3 and you're out

I was being tongue in cheek with FPN. But since you couldn’t comprehend the main point I’ll spell it out more sensibly.

The logical extension of that ruling is demonstrably not how the game is reffed. You will see what occurred at least once a game and let go. By the extension of that logic players shielding kickers should be penalised for obstruction almost every single time a bomb is put up in the NRL!

[luke]

Enjoyed that. Feeling good. Couldn’t care less about what it means for the rest of the season.

[raiderskater]

Great win. Is it coincidence the Raiders members email went out as soon as the match finished? Haha.

It actually went out with 5 minutes to go!

[BJ]

That's the right call, it's just **** luck
But interference is a mandatory penalty now, like high contact, doesnt matter if its accidental

That’s garbage

The rule? Yeah i think it is a bit garbage.
But given it IS the rule, they got it 100% right.

Don’t agree with you here Pigman. It was off a kick from the Tigers and Josh Hodgson was just standing still. This has never been the way refs or video refs have interpreted this situation previously.

This will lead to defenders running into players after a kick Willy nilly if this becomes the new interpretation.

As for Shannon Boyd having his try disallowed, that was a crazy overturn based on the rules the video ref is meant to apply.

[CJ42]

Did I hear correctly that the video ref thought Boyd’s try was sent up as no try!?

[Chicka Chicka Chicka]

So who is this Josh Hodgson fella?

[raiderskater]

Did I hear correctly that the video ref thought Boyd’s try was sent up as no try!?

That was what they were saying on Fox. The incompetence is breathtaking.

[raiderskater]

Bunker finally tweeted an explanation. And it's full of ****.

https://twitter.com/NRLBunker/status/10 ... 7031391232

[gangrenous]

Did I hear correctly that the video ref thought Boyd’s try was sent up as no try!?

That has to be right. No other explanation.

[bonehead]

Bunker finally tweeted an explanation. And it's full of ****.

https://twitter.com/NRLBunker/status/10 ... 7031391232

incompetence

Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[RedRaider]

Not only did we gain the two competition points we actually beat a side above us on the ladder. Yes they were depleted but a win is a win and the side can now enjoy their week off. Good luck to those playing rep footy next week.

[BJ]

I’m pretty sure that the refs boss will apologise for getting the Shannon Boyd overturn wrong.

By my count this will be the tenth bad call against the Raiders formally admitted by the refs boss. With only one admitted as wrong in the Raiders favour.

This continues some Daily Telegraph analysis of about a decade ago.