2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

[Raiders_Pat]

There were some absolutely bizarre moments eg. when the play was stopped to allow the Roosters to make an interchange when we were on the front foot with the ball... but putting that aside, I thought our halves play was unorganised, we had by far the inferior kicking game and poor use of interchange. We definitely have some work to do in the next few weeks.

[Raiders_Pat]

There were some absolutely bizarre moments eg. when the play was stopped to allow the Roosters to make an interchange when we were on the front foot with the ball... but putting that aside, I thought our halves play was unorganised (which also led to poor fifth tackle options), we had by far the inferior kicking game and poor use of interchange. We definitely have some work to do in the next few weeks.

[-TW-]

How good is Tupou. He took a thousand hit ups and tough carries out of trouble. Our wingers should take note

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Raps work out of hooker this year has been suboptimal to say the least

Stops fends, fends, gets gang tackled

Every god damn time

Sent from my CPH1831 using Tapatalk

[raiderskater]

The Tupou contest reminded me instantly of Croker jumping up to contest, eyes on the ball, colliding with the big name star contesting with him, said big name star tips over and Croker is immediately penalised.

It's a joke to see the Roosters fans complaining about the reffing. They were constantly offside and the ruck action was absolutely disgusting. Whitehead getting put on report was ridiculous and they're obviously rorting the HIA system. Mitchell is an absolute cat.

We also did too many stupid things today. Good god I love Cotric but wow he can be a really dumb footy player. That double movement was beyond stupid. Rapana is slow, reluctant to jump, and I'm really concerned about him. He's either unfit or something else is wrong. And don't get me started on some of the passing. At least three quarters of Sezer's problem today was getting garbage passes that were either way too slow, down at his ankles or stretched to take above his head. If you want your halfback to set stuff up you gotta give him the room to.

I have to say my heart almost stopped when Wighton came limping away from that in-goal collision. Glad he seemed to run it out. hopefully just a bad knock.

[Leebola]

And don't get me started on some of the passing. At least three quarters of Sezer's problem today was getting garbage passes that were either way too slow, down at his ankles or stretched to take above his head. If you want your halfback to set stuff up you gotta give him the room to.

I noticed that too - totally agree. These are pro footballers that can't seem to land a ball on the chest!

[Woodgers]

Skater you've actually hit on the point that I originally wanted to make but completely forgot in my post

Things that annoyed me most in that match:
1. Raiders game management
2. The referees not understanding the flow of the game and allowing the Roosters to delay the play anytime we had momentum. That wasn't off the cuff, this is clearly their tactic to exploit the rules and it is disgraceful. Anytime we tried to play fast and get on with the game we were stifled by the tactic and Ricky needs to take it up with Annesley this week. I'm sure he'll be all ears.

[CJ42]

hodgson had trouble today, slow as hell ruck.

[GreenMachine]

Yeah I cannot agree with the Mitchell try decision.

It went up as ‘no try’ and in my opinion that never gets overturned.

Had it gone upstairs as a try, I’d live with it.

Annoying because the match was so close.

Both teams were far from perfect. My fear is that by not claiming a win, we create doubt amongst ourselves that we can indeed win these games.

[Canberra Milk]

Interesting that Vunivalu has been penalised for a mistimed contest vs Souths

Not the same situation as the Souths player didn't have the ball yet unlike CNK, but interesting

[BJ]

Not even close to forward...

I was side on to that pass high in the Grandstand and it was clearly forward. The camera angles make them look different on replay.

The crowd side onto the pass all went up at the same time and the touchie was in perfect position to rule. That’s why it was called forward and the Roosters players didn’t kick up a stink.

[Botman]

Interesting that Vunivalu has been penalised for a mistimed contest vs Souths

Not the same situation as the Souths player didn't have the ball yet unlike CNK, but interesting

I think both calls were right
Both players have a right to the football

For CNK, Topou comes in to attack the ball, realises he's flat footed and has no leverage to out leap CNK who's coming in hot... he's entitled to stand his ground, he's not entitled to attack the player in the air and he didnt. CNK spills it, try time.

i've seen it argued here "Well, then that's what everyone should do, get under the ball and not contest!"
And that's fine, and 99/100 the fullback wont try and take a mark of the year speccy over the top of said player and wrap up and tackle. Which is what CNK should have done here. It was a classic "Theirs!" call imo. Let em have it, and tackle him immediately, if they want to try and throw it out the back or tap it around or whatever, ill take my chances there. Those rarely work that far out from the line, and we had bodies around.

Vunivalu leaps to attack the ball, is so god damn early that he lands before the ball even gets near the contest. He's taken the Rabbitohs player out off the ball. The Rabbitohs player was denied a fair crack at the footy, CNK wasnt, He got as clean a look as you could want, except he was trying to take it over the top of another player.

[Goldcoast Raider]

There were some absolutely bizarre moments eg. when the play was stopped to allow the Roosters to make an interchange when we were on the front foot with the ball... but putting that aside, I thought our halves play was unorganised, we had by far the inferior kicking game and poor use of interchange. We definitely have some work to do in the next few weeks.

What about when the refs called play on then we tackled Cronk after the scrum and then got penalised for Wighton coming out to quick

[Botman]

There were some absolutely bizarre moments eg. when the play was stopped to allow the Roosters to make an interchange when we were on the front foot with the ball... but putting that aside, I thought our halves play was unorganised, we had by far the inferior kicking game and poor use of interchange. We definitely have some work to do in the next few weeks.

What about when the refs called play on then we tackled Cronk after the scrum and then got penalised for Wighton coming out to quick

The incident in question for Raiders Pat was a mandatory interchange due to a HIA. The game has to be stopped for this, due to the welfare of the player.

The one you're referring too, i believe we were penalised for striking at the ball, not for offside, which i didnt know was illegal but apparently is (if i can be **** later im going to root around the rule book for this)

Edit: I decided just to look this up and boy these scrum rules are ridiculous
https://www.nrl.com/siteassets/operatio ... k-2019.pdf
Pg 31

When the ball is in the scrum it can only be played
Scrum with the foot.

The front row forwards shall not advance their feet into the tunnel or have one foot raised before the ball is put in or strike for the ball before the hookers.
A hooker may strike for the ball with either foot once it has contacted the ground in the tunnel.
After the hookers have struck for the ball the other forwards in the scrum may kick or heel the ball.

I think they got Whitehead for striking at the footy before the hookers did

[raiderskater]

There were some absolutely bizarre moments eg. when the play was stopped to allow the Roosters to make an interchange when we were on the front foot with the ball... but putting that aside, I thought our halves play was unorganised, we had by far the inferior kicking game and poor use of interchange. We definitely have some work to do in the next few weeks.

What about when the refs called play on then we tackled Cronk after the scrum and then got penalised for Wighton coming out to quick

The incident in question for Raiders Pat was a mandatory interchange due to a HIA. The game has to be stopped for this, due to the welfare of the player.

Welfare of the player my goddamn ***, the Roosters were absolutely rorting that today, waiting five minutes or more after each injury until we had the ball and were on the front foot and then MYSTERIOUSLY play had to be stopped.

[Botman]

Welfare of the player my goddamn ***, the Roosters were absolutely rorting that today, waiting five minutes or more after each injury until we had the ball and were on the front foot and then MYSTERIOUSLY play had to be stopped.

Player welfare is their rationale for the rule. If a player is identified as someone that should go off for a HIA, they are obligated to stop the game and get him off the field. I dont care to argue about it beyond that because it's a pointless.

It was a HIA, the game wasnt stopped for some regulation interchange, im am pro player welfare and would like to see the NRL not get sued into oblivion when the CTE class action comes their way. Signs of concussion are not always eveident immediately, which is why they are mandated to be off the park for 15 minutes for the HIA.

[greeneyed]

MATCH REPORT: Sydney Roosters hold on against pressing Canberra Raiders







It wasn't how it was meant to end. Canberra Raiders co-captain Jarrod Croker watching on from the sidelines with a head knock as the clock ran down. While he scored a try, he didn't get the win he was looking for.

SYDNEY ROOSTERS 22 (Daniel Tupou 2, Victor Radley, Latrell Mitchell tries; Mitchell 3 goals) bt CANBERRA RAIDERS 18 (Jordan Rapana, Jarrod Croker, Elliott Whitehead tries; Croker 3 goals) at Canberra Stadium. Referees: Ashley Klein, Chris Sutton. Crowd: 19,530.

Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14239

Reshuffle on the cards for Canberra Raiders outside backs following Sydney Roosters defeat

Canberra Raiders winger Bailey Simonsson could be forgiven for feeling a little hard done by if he gets the tap on the shoulder this week.

Star centre Joey Leilua is on the cusp of a return from a career-threatening neck injury and Simonsson is the man most likely to make way.

Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14239

Canberra Raiders good enough to win grand final: Stuart: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14280

Loss to Roosters doesn't dent Raiders' title dreams: Stuart

Ricky Stuart believes he is still in control of a side with the skill to win the NRL premiership this season, despite losing to the Sydney Roosters for the second time this season by four points.

"If we were playing a grand final tomorrow, I'd be confident," Stuart said. "If we were playing in the grand final tomorrow, against whoever is perceived as being the best team, I reckon we could beat them.

Read more: https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/08/11/los ... ms-stuart/

Fans vote for stripping rule but Trent Robinson not a supporter: https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/08/11/fan ... supporter/

MATCH REPORT: Tedesco, Keary lead Roosters to thrilling win over Raiders: https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/08/11/ted ... r-raiders/

https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/08 ... t-raiders/

MATCH HIGHLIGHTS: https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/08/11/mat ... -roosters/

PRESS CONFERENCES: https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/08 ... -roosters/

https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/08 ... -round-21/

@TheGHRaiders on Twitter

Time to vote for your favourite #Canberra #Raiders, #GreenNation! #NRL #WeAreRaiders #wearecbr

NRL Team of the Week: Round 21 https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/08/11/cho ... -round-21/ via @NRL

[Northern Raider]

Welfare of the player my goddamn ***, the Roosters were absolutely rorting that today, waiting five minutes or more after each injury until we had the ball and were on the front foot and then MYSTERIOUSLY play had to be stopped.

Player welfare is their rationale for the rule. If a player is identified as someone that should go off for a HIA, they are obligated to stop the game and get him off the field. I dont care to argue about it beyond that because it's a pointless.

It was a HIA, the game wasnt stopped for some regulation interchange, im am pro player welfare and would like to see the NRL not get sued into oblivion when the CTE class action comes their way. Signs of concussion are not always eveident immediately, which is why they are mandated to be off the park for 15 minutes for the HIA.

The HIA rules are fine IMO. Application of the rule is where it's clouded and this is a case in point. I really cannot understand the delays we're seeing before a player goes off. Play is stopped while they're initially treated. Should not be stopped again 5 mins later for that player to be replaced. Needs to be simplified. If play is stopped for a player to get treated for a head injury then they should go off straight away for a HIA.

[Dr Zaius]

My only concern with the officiating was the timing of that HIA request. I've no doubt that was held back and made at a time when we had momentum. That's not on the refs. While it's a poor tactic from the roosters, you can't blame them for emploiting it. The nrl needs a rule tweak around it.

[Botman]

Welfare of the player my goddamn ***, the Roosters were absolutely rorting that today, waiting five minutes or more after each injury until we had the ball and were on the front foot and then MYSTERIOUSLY play had to be stopped.

Player welfare is their rationale for the rule. If a player is identified as someone that should go off for a HIA, they are obligated to stop the game and get him off the field. I dont care to argue about it beyond that because it's a pointless.

It was a HIA, the game wasnt stopped for some regulation interchange, im am pro player welfare and would like to see the NRL not get sued into oblivion when the CTE class action comes their way. Signs of concussion are not always eveident immediately, which is why they are mandated to be off the park for 15 minutes for the HIA.

The HIA rules are fine IMO. Application of the rule is where it's clouded and this is a case in point. I really cannot understand the delays we're seeing before a player goes off. Play is stopped while they're initially treated. Should not be stopped again 5 mins later for that player to be replaced. Needs to be simplified. If play is stopped for a player to get treated for a head injury then they should go off straight away for a HIA.

I agree... but play was stopped for a back injury, according to Robinson.
So that doesnt help us here.

[Botman]

Stuart's presser was spot on too btw.
He knows whats up

[Green Taipan]

We lost today mainly because out attack was so disjointed and lacking punch. We had a number of chances but didn't take them. Too much one-out when the chooks were short out wide and Hodgson overplayed his hand on too many plays. Sezer has improved a lot over the last few games but went missing today. We can play better but so can the chooks! Interesting to see how we handle the Storm. I also agree with posters who question Rapana's fitness; he looks out of sorts.

[bonehead]

they had a few bits of luck, I'm looking forward to September

[Northern Raider]

Welfare of the player my goddamn ***, the Roosters were absolutely rorting that today, waiting five minutes or more after each injury until we had the ball and were on the front foot and then MYSTERIOUSLY play had to be stopped.

Player welfare is their rationale for the rule. If a player is identified as someone that should go off for a HIA, they are obligated to stop the game and get him off the field. I dont care to argue about it beyond that because it's a pointless.

It was a HIA, the game wasnt stopped for some regulation interchange, im am pro player welfare and would like to see the NRL not get sued into oblivion when the CTE class action comes their way. Signs of concussion are not always eveident immediately, which is why they are mandated to be off the park for 15 minutes for the HIA.

The HIA rules are fine IMO. Application of the rule is where it's clouded and this is a case in point. I really cannot understand the delays we're seeing before a player goes off. Play is stopped while they're initially treated. Should not be stopped again 5 mins later for that player to be replaced. Needs to be simplified. If play is stopped for a player to get treated for a head injury then they should go off straight away for a HIA.

I agree... but play was stopped for a back injury, according to Robinson.
So that doesnt help us here.

This only clouds it further. If he had a back injury he should not have been going off for a HIA. If he did suffer a head injury when play was stopped then that's when he needed to be taken off.

There in lies the problem. As it stands now the rule is there to be exploited.

[Woodgers]

Pigman, agree with your assessment of the Mitchell try and I think most footy players would see it that way. I mean, everything isn't a technicality and the fullback had a fair play at it so I believe that's a try and always should be. We can't complain.

As for the revelation about the scrum penalty....this is what absolutely **** people beyond reason. So depending who the ref is you can't strike at the ball? Do the players know this? Because if they do then it's a strike against Whitehead but what is the bet in the next month we see a player boot the ball against the feed in a scrum and they get a result. Why would those bozos decide you can't try win the ball in a apparent contested space? If it isn't a contested space then scrap it. Just sheer madness.

Robinson is being a ****. He is training his players to kill momentum using the rules as his tool. He needs to take a seat in this space as he's the problem and asking the NRL for solutions.

[Northern Raider]

Stuart's presser was spot on too btw.
He knows whats up

Which part? I didn't take much for the presser other than he's comfortable where we're at.

[Botman]

Stuart's presser was spot on too btw.
He knows whats up

Which part? I didn't take much for the presser other than he's comfortable where we're at.

That's whats up. And he knows it. We're fine.

[Botman]

Robinson is being a ****. He is training his players to kill momentum using the rules as his tool.

That's not how i see it at all, i actually think situation is far more appalling than some tactic to stop us from getting a quick play the ball on tackle 5, 30 out from the try line. But there can be nothing gained from arguing it with people so im just not going to bother... this week

[Botman]

FWIW I think the roosters probably knew he should have come off for HIA, but because they didnt really have a logical answer for his absence, they tried skirting around it and avoid a HIA all together, and most likely the call for the HIA came from someone who wasnt the trainer or coach. Perhaps one of the staff's medical teams.

I think teams including ours have done this a lot and i think if the game is actually serious about player welfare, the NRL needs to fully invest in this. The bunker should have an independent specialist on deck to review these straight away and take this out of the clubs hands.

Trainers should have mandatory mics, and the audio should be examined in every instances and any time a club is found to have kept a player on the park where a head injury is concerned should be HEAVILY fined. Im talking 100k at a starting point and esculators for repeat offenders.

Make it so significant financially that clubs HAVE to air on the side of caution rather than what happens now. That's how you put player welfare first.

[Seiffert82]

My God the Roosters were lucky today.

Tough game, but they dead set got kicked in the **** by a rainbow at key moments. Quite a few nice little penalties there to gift them field position.

I thought out attack looked disjointed at times because the game was officiated in such a way that we never had a chance to gain any sort of momentum.

The Roosters exploited that well. We made a few key errors that handed them point scoring opportunities, but on the whole I thought we looked very likely to win that game.

[julian87]

My take on the game lies with the one thing I think Ricky Stuart has got wrong this season; the forward rotation at full strength. Stuart and the team have been brilliant beyond belief this year. I'm not frustrated by this like I have been with things in the past but I just see a pattern in hard games that I think is more than just coincidence. Our best 3 attacking middles are Papalii, Tapine and Soliola. Now we almost all thought at the start of the year that there was every chance we'd struggle up the guts and have been pleasantly surprised by Lui, Sutton and Horsburgh. That being said, those 3 as a combination, are not very good in attack. They have their advantages (and Lui has been very, very good of late including today) but none of them are top tier. And I think Sutton has shown all year that he can do a really good job starting but he really struggles to provide any impact at all as a bench player.

I've banged on about this a few times so it will be broken record stuff, sorry. Those blokes I've mentioned are not good enough to play 20 minutes or so with Papalii and Tapine on the bench if we want to win a premiership. Simple as that IMO. I'm a long time subscriber of every minute of the game being as important as the next. I've oft suggested benching important player to start a match, oft to plenty of criticism, but I really think that's needed if we want to win the competition. I could be wrong here and I watched the game in a bit of a rush today but it definitely felt like we really battled between minutes 28 or so through minute 55 of thereabouts. I've 100% convinced myself that this is our biggest problem moving forward. No player wants to be benched, I get that, but we're a better shot at winning the comp with Sutton at 13 and Tapine coming on after 15-25 mins and playing the rest of the game straight (or at least so he or Papalii are always on the field) if he can manage it.

Now the other thing is I am resigned to us not having the ball play of the other teams. To win the competition we rely on being scrappers and back ourselves to be better/stronger/more witty or full of nous than the opposition 1 v 1 to push for higher honours. This is why we need Leilua to come back in at right centre if possible. It adds another point of attack, combination and someone who can ball play before and through the line. And it releases Rapana, not just deep in attack, but someone to work with in tandem coming out of our end given most others in the team are better rucking the ball from left to right from our end.

That's pretty much what I reckon all up. I was happy with today's performance and I think Easts won just because they have that extra ball playing that we don't. I think Tedesco ball playing on the sweep play in comparison to us edged the game in their favour. In the finals we perhaps need to implement Rapana, Croker or Leilua into those positions CNK gets himself hemmed into.

[Woodgers]

Robinson is being a ****. He is training his players to kill momentum using the rules as his tool.

That's not how i see it at all, i actually think situation is far more appalling than some tactic to stop us from getting a quick play the ball on tackle 5, 30 out from the try line. But there can be nothing gained from arguing it with people so im just not going to bother... this week

So Nicko, my comment aside....you didn't think the Roosters skirted the rules today to delay the momentum and fast football we wanted to play? I'm confused at what you're trying to say here.

[Botman]

Robinson is being a ****. He is training his players to kill momentum using the rules as his tool.

That's not how i see it at all, i actually think situation is far more appalling than some tactic to stop us from getting a quick play the ball on tackle 5, 30 out from the try line. But there can be nothing gained from arguing it with people so im just not going to bother... this week

So Nicko, my comment aside....you didn't think the Roosters skirted the rules today to delay the momentum and fast football we wanted to play? I'm confused at what you're trying to say here.

In relation to this HIA for Manu? No.

[Woodgers]

Both

[Botman]

Both

In general, outside of the Manu HIA
Yeah, they were pretty keen to get stoppages and stop us from getting momentum

We can sit here and debate the merits of players “faking” injuries to get those stoppages but I don’t see much point in that given these stoppages for injured players isn’t going anywhere, because quite rightly we’re not going to ask officials to judge who’s faking it and who isn’t
So like it or not, we’ll just have to find a way to deal with it. It’s the same for every team. Up to us to figure it out

[julian87]

It’s frustrating but in the end it’s just pretty clever gamesmanship tbh. There’s nothing you can do about it but hope the refs wake up to it if t gets ridiculous.