2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

All the news on the Canberra Raiders NRL team, all in one place

Moderator: GH Moderators

Who will win?

Raiders 13+
2
17%
Raiders 1-12
7
58%
Draw
0
No votes
Roosters 1-12
1
8%
Roosters 13+
2
17%
 
Total votes: 12

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126175
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » August 12, 2019, 10:57 am

yeh raiders wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:48 am
I’m so sick of the stripping rule. Ruins the flow of the game.

We’re pretty good at it, but at a crucial time yesterday we decided to spend an entire set trying to strip a ball and gave away about 60 metres when we should be looking to keep the Roosters in our half.

People argue about having more ball security... if there was a genuine issue with ball security, there’d be more errors in general play.

Throw 3 men in a tackle and 1 defenders job is to lock up the ball, then make a call for the others to peel out so he can put his entire weight behind a strip. That’s not a ball security issue, it’s obviously very difficult to keep control of it.

It’s just not Rugby League.

Further to that, both Ricky and Trent Robinson argued that it’s too complex for the refs and I totally agree.

Go back to the old rule and stop ruining Rugby League.

Basically the option for the game is offloads or more stripping - I’m choosing offloads everyday of the week.
The real "old" rule was allowing anyone to strip the ball at any time. It was still rugby league back then.

I love the way the rule is now interpreted, and 60 per cent of fans do too. It adds unpredictability. Plus we're darn good at it! Can't see why any Raiders fan would want it changed! ;)
Image

User avatar
Woodgers
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8150
Joined: February 1, 2005, 10:34 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by Woodgers » August 12, 2019, 10:59 am

Rickman I agree with you on the CNK one, I think that's a fair cop but what people are unhappy about is the fact that it is consistently a penalty all year and it wasn't on the day. I can get around that notion but for me I think the rule should be interpreted the way the refs did do it so i'm fine with that.

In regards to the Whitehead one, in hindsight i'll agree that last night I was arguing the rule more than the actual incident on that one but I do think falling should be a factor as it changes the entire tackle. I'm of the opinion that the defender can't do much there, not at that speed and the player cops a bump. I see where the administration is trying to sanitise it completely for the Mum's out there but my point is sometimes you're accidentally going to cop a head knock. Should Croker be penalised because his head bumped into Tedesco's and split him early in the first half? He's unintentionally caused a head injury to another player hasn't he? Croker and Whitehead had the exact same level of intent in both tackles. It's football, we don't want to get to the point where we over engineer every single thing. Happy to agree to disagree but I'll back the calls to stamp out foul, dirty or niggly play like Rapana's swinging arm late in the game, but taking the Raiders completely out of it, I believe it is harsh to penalise a player in that instance.
We continue to **** about with blokes that are part of some fraternity. It's infuriating.

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126175
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » August 12, 2019, 11:00 am

pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:40 am
In close games it takes some brilliance to create points. Tedesco did it twice. That was the difference between the teams.

Have to disagree re CNK. Hi think it should be the right call but that isn’t how it has been called all season. Doesn’t matter that he wasn’t trying to make a tackle, he made contact with CNK and interferes with him catching the ball. It wasn’t the difference but that is how it has been called all season, including in the very next game.

One of our tries came from what looked to be a knock on so they cancel each other out IMO
That was definitely not a knock on for the Raiders try. 100 per cent fine. Even Greg Alexander said so!

I agree on the CNK incident... but I can see how it can be argued the other way. It wasn't a 50-50 call IMO, it should have been penalised. But it wasn't a 100-0 call either.
Image

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126175
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » August 12, 2019, 11:02 am

Wiki Special wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:51 am
The refs were ordinary against both teams. The main gripe I have is similar to others - the Roosters laid all over us in the ruck with no repercussions and any time we were gaining any sort of momentum one of their players was 'injured'.

This really annoyed me more after listening to Trent Robinson in the press conference talking about the stripping. Apparently we are exploiting a **** rule. Yet, in my opinion, the laying in the ruck and 'injured' players was 100% gamesmanship. And the refs were dumb enough to fall for it. We can be getting grabbed and held in the ruck all game and if you listen to the ref 99% of this is due to 'milking'. Compared to other teams we milk double or triple other sides which is ludicrous.
Yep, it annoyed the hell out of me too!
Image

User avatar
GreenMachine
Gary Coyne
Posts: 114
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by GreenMachine » August 12, 2019, 11:04 am

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 9:47 am

And the CNK thing? Tupou didn't tackle him in the air, and didn't even attempt to. That's clear cut, black and white, not even sure why anyone would think that's a penalty. I swear you guys have zero ability to watch a Raiders game with even the slightest ounce of objectivity. And before anyone accuses me of trying to go the opposite on refereeing decisions as some kind of moral crusade, that's simply not true. Trust me when I say I was watching that replay hoping for something, ANYTHING, that could be a penalty as it was a crucial moment in the game, but you simply couldn't call that one. And Raiders fans would be blowing up DELUXE if that one was reversed and went against us. That's not what the rule was brought it for.
On this point, I think the issue is the fact that Tupou interferes with the play.

The fact that the ground ref calls it 'no try' is the big problem for me. The video ref rarely overturns those sorts of calls and that's why the decision doesn't sit well with me. Had the ref sent it up as a try, I'd have no problem with it.

I agree with you that we had more than enough rub of the green to win that game. Shame we didn't from a physiological point of view more than anything.

Agree that we will need to beat the Roosters and Melbourne once this year to win the GF....winning yesterday was more a psychological point than a necessity.

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22628
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by Northern Raider » August 12, 2019, 11:05 am

pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:40 am
In close games it takes some brilliance to create points. Tedesco did it twice. That was the difference between the teams.

Have to disagree re CNK. Hi think it should be the right call but that isn’t how it has been called all season. Doesn’t matter that he wasn’t trying to make a tackle, he made contact with CNK and interferes with him catching the ball. It wasn’t the difference but that is how it has been called all season, including in the very next game.

One of our tries came from what looked to be a knock on so they cancel each other out IMO
Very next game Storm scored a try and bunker overruled saying the attacking player mistimed his jump and inconvenienced the defender. Conflicts with the call in our game.
Last edited by Northern Raider on August 12, 2019, 11:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126175
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » August 12, 2019, 11:07 am

NRL.com power rankings

3. Canberra Raiders (3)
The loss to the Roosters wasn't one they wanted or needed, but they weren't far off and it won't hurt their confidence. More importantly, you seem to learn more from losing those games than you learn from just beating teams you should beat every week. It is a concern for Ricky Stuart that they're conceding over their defensive average against the top echelon sides. They've got a tough run home and are pretty much playing finals footy from now until the end of their season.

Read more: https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/08/12/sow ... ight-back/

Round 21 Moment of the week: Croker scores in game 250: https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/08 ... -game-250/
Image

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126175
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » August 12, 2019, 11:11 am

RedRaider wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:02 am
greeneyed wrote:
August 12, 2019, 7:11 am
That first try was caused by a player racing up and producing the ineffective tackle, but Jack Wighton was the player to do it... at least first. The left edge was already short men, and then the decision inside Croker left that edge even more exposed.
GE, from my position in Section 55 I had a perfect view of it. JC came up and in when he did not need to. It allowed Teddy to get on his outside. If he holds his line it does not create the gap on the outside. He is a special player Teddy with abundant pace. Holding a straight line is essential in defending him. Having a staggered line is simply asking for trouble and he gave it to us.
But the Raiders were done for numbers by then. No matter what Croker did, there would have been a try, because Wighton ran out of the line, and went inside and came up with an ineffective tackle.
Image

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43049
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by The Rickman » August 12, 2019, 11:32 am

Woodgers wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:59 am
Rickman I agree with you on the CNK one, I think that's a fair cop but what people are unhappy about is the fact that it is consistently a penalty all year and it wasn't on the day. I can get around that notion but for me I think the rule should be interpreted the way the refs did do it so i'm fine with that.

In regards to the Whitehead one, in hindsight i'll agree that last night I was arguing the rule more than the actual incident on that one but I do think falling should be a factor as it changes the entire tackle. I'm of the opinion that the defender can't do much there, not at that speed and the player cops a bump. I see where the administration is trying to sanitise it completely for the Mum's out there but my point is sometimes you're accidentally going to cop a head knock. Should Croker be penalised because his head bumped into Tedesco's and split him early in the first half? He's unintentionally caused a head injury to another player hasn't he? Croker and Whitehead had the exact same level of intent in both tackles. It's football, we don't want to get to the point where we over engineer every single thing. Happy to agree to disagree but I'll back the calls to stamp out foul, dirty or niggly play like Rapana's swinging arm late in the game, but taking the Raiders completely out of it, I believe it is harsh to penalise a player in that instance.
I don't agree to that.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22628
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by Northern Raider » August 12, 2019, 11:37 am

greeneyed wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:11 am
RedRaider wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:02 am
greeneyed wrote:
August 12, 2019, 7:11 am
That first try was caused by a player racing up and producing the ineffective tackle, but Jack Wighton was the player to do it... at least first. The left edge was already short men, and then the decision inside Croker left that edge even more exposed.
GE, from my position in Section 55 I had a perfect view of it. JC came up and in when he did not need to. It allowed Teddy to get on his outside. If he holds his line it does not create the gap on the outside. He is a special player Teddy with abundant pace. Holding a straight line is essential in defending him. Having a staggered line is simply asking for trouble and he gave it to us.
But the Raiders were done for numbers by then. No matter what Croker did, there would have been a try, because Wighton ran out of the line, and went inside and came up with an ineffective tackle.
Definite defensive error from Croker but he wasn't solely responsible.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43049
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by The Rickman » August 12, 2019, 11:39 am

I don't know what you guys expect Croker to do when his inside man screams out of the line and leaves a gaping hole. He has to jam in and follow Wighton!
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

RedRaider
Steve Walters
Posts: 7354
Joined: March 3, 2007, 7:02 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by RedRaider » August 12, 2019, 11:40 am

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:08 am
RedRaider wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:02 am
greeneyed wrote:
August 12, 2019, 7:11 am
That first try was caused by a player racing up and producing the ineffective tackle, but Jack Wighton was the player to do it... at least first. The left edge was already short men, and then the decision inside Croker left that edge even more exposed.
GE, from my position in Section 55 I had a perfect view of it. JC came up and in when he did not need to. It allowed Teddy to get on his outside. If he holds his line it does not create the gap on the outside. He is a special player Teddy with abundant pace. Holding a straight line is essential in defending him. Having a staggered line is simply asking for trouble and he gave it to us.
Might want to log onto NRL.com and look at that one again, Red. Jack Wighton 100% runs out of the line and leaves a massive hole. Croker has to follow him and then gets caught flat-footed in a one-on-one situation with Tedesco. He then tries to catch Tedesco but is beaten on the outside by pure speed.

If Croker doesn't come in to support his inside man for rushing up, Tedesco just burns him on the inside in the massive hole Jack left.

Check it out here... https://www.nrl.com/tv/news/match-highl ... rs-936575/ Pause the video at the two second mark, you'll see what I'm talking about. No way that's on Croker.
I've looked at it live and on replay, Rickman, the fact Jack goes up does not mean JC has too at all. If JC holds his position no outside gap is created. If you look at the still of when Teddy gets the ball and begins his run (about the 6 second mark) EW is already further left than Jack covering the hole on the inside. Tarps is right behind EW and Jack is also moving left. Teddy sees the space outside JC and goes for it. If JC holds his position no space is created on the outside and EW has the inside space where Jack was. JC needs to be more patient and hold his position in the line. I know these are split second defensive decisions but our structure is better this year than previous years and it doesn't need JC to come out of the line even if Jack does.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43049
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by The Rickman » August 12, 2019, 11:44 am

Red, if your inside man screams out of the line and leaves a gaping hole you need to go with him and try and shut the play down. Otherwise he's just backpeddling and caught in no-man's land and Teddy burns him on the inside.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
GreenMachine
Gary Coyne
Posts: 114
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Are we premiership contenders?

Post by GreenMachine » August 12, 2019, 11:53 am

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:27 am
What poor video ref decision? I struggle to think of one.
The on ground "No Try" that was overturned as "Try" by the video ref when we were 12-6 up.

For mine, that overturn never happens - even rarer occurrence in big games where small decisions impact the games result.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43049
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: Are we premiership contenders?

Post by The Rickman » August 12, 2019, 12:00 pm

GreenMachine wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:53 am
The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:27 am
What poor video ref decision? I struggle to think of one.
The on ground "No Try" that was overturned as "Try" by the video ref when we were 12-6 up.

For mine, that overturn never happens - even rarer occurrence in big games where small decisions impact the games result.
It's one of my pet peeves when they overturn the on-field referee's call without clear cut evidence, it really grinds my goat, but... I think they actually got this one right. He's not playing at CNK at all.

I do note though, that several other posters are pointing out that that's not how they've called that in other games this year. I have to admit I only really watch the Raiders and Origin these days, so if that's the case then there's call to say we might have been unlucky.

To mine that's not a penalty, he's going for the ball and mistimes it, and that's never been a penalty. But IF they are indeed ruling that the other way this year, then it's baffling for the video ref to have overturned a live call of No Try.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
pickles
Jason Croker
Posts: 4695
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by pickles » August 12, 2019, 12:02 pm

Northern Raider wrote:
pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:40 am
In close games it takes some brilliance to create points. Tedesco did it twice. That was the difference between the teams.

Have to disagree re CNK. Hi think it should be the right call but that isn’t how it has been called all season. Doesn’t matter that he wasn’t trying to make a tackle, he made contact with CNK and interferes with him catching the ball. It wasn’t the difference but that is how it has been called all season, including in the very next game.

One of our tries came from what looked to be a knock on so they cancel each other out IMO
Very next game Storm scored a try and bunker overruled saying the attacking player mistimed his jump and inconvenienced the defender. Conflicts with the call in our game.
That’s pretty much what I’ve been saying. I’m not a fan of the interpretation but they’ve been pretty consistent all year and that stood out as a bad call.

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22628
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by Northern Raider » August 12, 2019, 12:10 pm

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:44 am
Red, if your inside man screams out of the line and leaves a gaping hole you need to go with him and try and shut the play down. Otherwise he's just backpeddling and caught in no-man's land and Teddy burns him on the inside.
I've seen it a couple of times and my initial thoughts haven't changed. The players inside jammed in and Croker was compelled to follow. No fault on his part there. The error came as I felt he over committed and allowed Teddy too much space outside him. In the same situation with 95% of the other NRL players I believe Croker is able to adjust and make the cover tackle. WIth Teddy its goodnight as he'll burn you just like he's been burning most players the past few years. Realistically a bit less agression is needed when marking Teddy on the sweep. I'd say they definitely learned from this as for the next 75 mins our left side remained fairly impregnable.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43049
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by The Rickman » August 12, 2019, 12:15 pm

pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:02 pm
Northern Raider wrote:
pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:40 am
In close games it takes some brilliance to create points. Tedesco did it twice. That was the difference between the teams.

Have to disagree re CNK. Hi think it should be the right call but that isn’t how it has been called all season. Doesn’t matter that he wasn’t trying to make a tackle, he made contact with CNK and interferes with him catching the ball. It wasn’t the difference but that is how it has been called all season, including in the very next game.

One of our tries came from what looked to be a knock on so they cancel each other out IMO
Very next game Storm scored a try and bunker overruled saying the attacking player mistimed his jump and inconvenienced the defender. Conflicts with the call in our game.
That’s pretty much what I’ve been saying. I’m not a fan of the interpretation but they’ve been pretty consistent all year and that stood out as a bad call.
Honestly, I didn't realise this when I made my comments, pick. Like I said, I only really watch Raiders games this year, but that didn't look like a penalty to me.

I hadn't realized they'd changed the interpretation though, makes it frustrating if they've overturned the on-field ref inconsistent with the 2019 interpretations of the rule.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22628
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by Northern Raider » August 12, 2019, 12:16 pm

pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:02 pm
Northern Raider wrote:
pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:40 am
In close games it takes some brilliance to create points. Tedesco did it twice. That was the difference between the teams.

Have to disagree re CNK. Hi think it should be the right call but that isn’t how it has been called all season. Doesn’t matter that he wasn’t trying to make a tackle, he made contact with CNK and interferes with him catching the ball. It wasn’t the difference but that is how it has been called all season, including in the very next game.

One of our tries came from what looked to be a knock on so they cancel each other out IMO
Very next game Storm scored a try and bunker overruled saying the attacking player mistimed his jump and inconvenienced the defender. Conflicts with the call in our game.
That’s pretty much what I’ve been saying. I’m not a fan of the interpretation but they’ve been pretty consistent all year and that stood out as a bad call.
Thats the most frustrating part for me. Rightly or wrongly this has always been deemed a penalty the past 2 years at least. Somehow this was the exception.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

FROG
Dean Lance
Posts: 855
Joined: April 7, 2008, 8:14 pm

Re: Are we premiership contenders?

Post by FROG » August 12, 2019, 12:18 pm

Ricknickmen, i dont watch much other (non raiders) rugby league games either these days, but i did catch 5 mins of the storm game and in those 5 mins i saw vinavalu set up a try which was overturned by the vid ref because he jumped too early and impeded the full back. This was despite the fact that he never took his eyes off the ball and ultimately tiped it back. It was the inverse of our decision.. im comfortable if the game wants to protect full backs ability to catch the ball, but it needs to be even remotely consistent. Tupou's was a mandatory penalty imo. he didnt have his eye on the ball and clearly wasnt contesting it, he was there to put pressure on cnk and put him in a dangerous position. That was the difference between the 2 sides

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43049
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by The Rickman » August 12, 2019, 12:21 pm

I just really hate when the video ref overturns the on-field ref unless it's truly black and white. When it's a 50/50 call and they overturn it really bugs me, and they do it quite often. It's my biggest gripe with the video ref system, not the system itself, but the frequency at which they overturn the on-field ref on a 50/50 call.

I was happy with this one being overturned at the time, but seeing the comments here about how they've called it all season it sounds like a stitchup.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
pickles
Jason Croker
Posts: 4695
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by pickles » August 12, 2019, 12:30 pm

The Rickman wrote:
pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:02 pm
Northern Raider wrote:
pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:40 am
In close games it takes some brilliance to create points. Tedesco did it twice. That was the difference between the teams.

Have to disagree re CNK. Hi think it should be the right call but that isn’t how it has been called all season. Doesn’t matter that he wasn’t trying to make a tackle, he made contact with CNK and interferes with him catching the ball. It wasn’t the difference but that is how it has been called all season, including in the very next game.

One of our tries came from what looked to be a knock on so they cancel each other out IMO
Very next game Storm scored a try and bunker overruled saying the attacking player mistimed his jump and inconvenienced the defender. Conflicts with the call in our game.
That’s pretty much what I’ve been saying. I’m not a fan of the interpretation but they’ve been pretty consistent all year and that stood out as a bad call.
Honestly, I didn't realise this when I made my comments, pick. Like I said, I only really watch Raiders games this year, but that didn't look like a penalty to me.

I hadn't realized they'd changed the interpretation though, makes it frustrating if they've overturned the on-field ref inconsistent with the 2019 interpretations of the rule.
There have been numerous cases this year where a player has been competing for the ball, missed and contacted the defender in the air and it has been a penalty. I don’t agree at all but pretty much any contact from an attacker has been a penalty all year and that is what the on field referees decision was based on.

To over turn it was madness. I specially given the try disallowed in the very next game by the same bunker! The point of the bunker was better consistency and this is a glaring example of a lack thereof.

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22628
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by Northern Raider » August 12, 2019, 12:33 pm

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:21 pm
I just really hate when the video ref overturns the on-field ref unless it's truly black and white. When it's a 50/50 call and they overturn it really bugs me, and they do it quite often. It's my biggest gripe with the video ref system, not the system itself, but the frequency at which they overturn the on-field ref on a 50/50 call.

I was happy with this one being overturned at the time, but seeing the comments here about how they've called it all season it sounds like a stitchup.
To make matters worse the call against the Storm was also overturning the on field decision of 'Try'. If either one was supporting the on field call then I wouldn't be as frustrated by it.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
zim
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6696
Joined: July 8, 2015, 3:38 pm
Favourite Player: Past: Brett Mullins
Present: Elliot Whitehead
Location: Sydney

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by zim » August 12, 2019, 12:42 pm

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:39 am
I don't know what you guys expect Croker to do when his inside man screams out of the line and leaves a gaping hole. He has to jam in and follow Wighton!
It's laughable really. Once Wighton makes that call it's done. The only way something is saved there is by the roosters **** up.

User avatar
GreenMachine
Gary Coyne
Posts: 114
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: Are we premiership contenders?

Post by GreenMachine » August 12, 2019, 12:46 pm

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:00 pm
GreenMachine wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:53 am
The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:27 am
What poor video ref decision? I struggle to think of one.
The on ground "No Try" that was overturned as "Try" by the video ref when we were 12-6 up.

For mine, that overturn never happens - even rarer occurrence in big games where small decisions impact the games result.
It's one of my pet peeves when they overturn the on-field referee's call without clear cut evidence, it really grinds my goat, but... I think they actually got this one right. He's not playing at CNK at all.

I do note though, that several other posters are pointing out that that's not how they've called that in other games this year. I have to admit I only really watch the Raiders and Origin these days, so if that's the case then there's call to say we might have been unlucky.

To mine that's not a penalty, he's going for the ball and mistimes it, and that's never been a penalty. But IF they are indeed ruling that the other way this year, then it's baffling for the video ref to have overturned a live call of No Try.
Yeah I'm not sure...

He interferes with CNK...if he was not going for the ball, he could just stop before CNK leaps and not back into him (while covering his face).

I would be less aggrieved if the on field ref let it go...but the fact that he ruled no try, tells me he saw enough from Tupou to suggest he interfered with CNK's play at the ball...

However, It's not THE reason why we lost and YES we had plenty go our way - enough to win that game regardless.

User avatar
pickles
Jason Croker
Posts: 4695
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by pickles » August 12, 2019, 12:47 pm

Does anyone think that we have been training some things that we are not putting into games just yet? It is clear that to win big finals you need to be able to throw things at teams that they aren't able to defend but with the analysis being so on point once you have used a strategy teams will be looking for it.

The Raiders have been playing a very conservative style of football, predominantly hitting it up one pass off the ruck early on with a lot of our attack coming off the back of offloads or quick play of the balls. This was highlighted by the chooks coach when he suggested that he knew exactly what we will throw at them.

I'm wondering whether or not there are some plays that we are keeping in the bag to bring out in the big games. It just seems that we are playing within ourselves at the moment and I'm hoping that we have a plan for taking it up a notch.

User avatar
CJ42
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12691
Joined: April 12, 2011, 5:13 pm

Re: Are we premiership contenders?

Post by CJ42 » August 12, 2019, 12:48 pm

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:00 pm
GreenMachine wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:53 am
The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:27 am
What poor video ref decision? I struggle to think of one.
The on ground "No Try" that was overturned as "Try" by the video ref when we were 12-6 up.

For mine, that overturn never happens - even rarer occurrence in big games where small decisions impact the games result.
It's one of my pet peeves when they overturn the on-field referee's call without clear cut evidence, it really grinds my goat, but... I think they actually got this one right. He's not playing at CNK at all.

I do note though, that several other posters are pointing out that that's not how they've called that in other games this year. I have to admit I only really watch the Raiders and Origin these days, so if that's the case then there's call to say we might have been unlucky.

To mine that's not a penalty, he's going for the ball and mistimes it, and that's never been a penalty. But IF they are indeed ruling that the other way this year, then it's baffling for the video ref to have overturned a live call of No Try.
generally if they've jumped to contest this year it's fine, but going under a player and not jumping with them, even with eyes on the ball, has been a penalty this year.
Image

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 22628
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: Are we premiership contenders?

Post by Northern Raider » August 12, 2019, 12:51 pm

Well we had a loss that wasn't unexpected. Fortunately other results worked in our favour and we've retained 3rd spot. A critical game will be vs Manly in 2 weeks. A win there would go a long way to securing a top 4 finish. A loss puts us at severe risk of dropping to the bottom half of the 8.

There's a real threat looming from the Eels. They have a relatively soft draw and could win all their remaining games. Fortunately its the Eels so expect them to lose their bundle at some stage.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
BadnMean
John Ferguson
Posts: 2672
Joined: May 13, 2013, 5:30 pm
Favourite Player: chicka

Re: Are we premiership contenders?

Post by BadnMean » August 12, 2019, 12:56 pm

GreenMachine wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:53 am
The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 9:52 am
I still think we'll win the comp this year and last night's game only solidified that feeling.
I think Hodgson had his worst game for us in quite a while.


Papalii was a beast yesterday and you can see the minute he steps off the pitch, the opposition gain the ascendancy.

We had the Roosters on the rack at 12-6 but a brain explosion from Cotric lets them off.

The key will be whether Ricky can get them to bounce back in Melbourne.
I think Hodgo will have one look at the video and how often he just ran around in a full circle before passing and see what a momentum killer that was. He'll know what to fix.

I agree on Papa. Part of that is that Sutton offers nothing off the bench. He's a starter or bust. He just can't adjust his game to give impact. He'll keep playing most likely but he's a total waste there. We might be able to start him at prop to salvage something but I'd rather see Lui or Sia start. Then one of them and Hors + Young come off the bench. That gives us one experienced + a young tyro tearing in.

I should have included Cotric in my earlier post about the 3/4 line. His misses in D were worse than Toots and yeah the triple movement was poor. I'd be more forgiving if it was the first time he's done that. He was rusty and will be better for the run though, he's missed a lot of footy lately.

We do need to beat Melbourne to establish a benchmark against the contenders. Otherwise it is pretty clear Chooks n Roosters are the deserved top 2 and then it's daylight to us at 3rd best.

Rooters had some key forwards out and we were all hands on deck really. Joey is a bonus wildcard at this stage.

yeh raiders
Laurie Daley
Posts: 15127
Joined: June 21, 2008, 3:04 pm
Favourite Player: Jack Wighton
Location: Sydney

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by yeh raiders » August 12, 2019, 12:57 pm

greeneyed wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:57 am
yeh raiders wrote:
August 12, 2019, 10:48 am
I’m so sick of the stripping rule. Ruins the flow of the game.

We’re pretty good at it, but at a crucial time yesterday we decided to spend an entire set trying to strip a ball and gave away about 60 metres when we should be looking to keep the Roosters in our half.

People argue about having more ball security... if there was a genuine issue with ball security, there’d be more errors in general play.

Throw 3 men in a tackle and 1 defenders job is to lock up the ball, then make a call for the others to peel out so he can put his entire weight behind a strip. That’s not a ball security issue, it’s obviously very difficult to keep control of it.

It’s just not Rugby League.

Further to that, both Ricky and Trent Robinson argued that it’s too complex for the refs and I totally agree.

Go back to the old rule and stop ruining Rugby League.

Basically the option for the game is offloads or more stripping - I’m choosing offloads everyday of the week.
The real "old" rule was allowing anyone to strip the ball at any time. It was still rugby league back then.

I love the way the rule is now interpreted, and 60 per cent of fans do too. It adds unpredictability. Plus we're darn good at it! Can't see why any Raiders fan would want it changed! ;)
Because I’m a rugby league fan and the game continues to decline. Refs are struggling to keep up as it is and offloads are an attacking weapon which we want.

And because it worked against us during an absolutely crucial time of the match.

Was the fan survey promoted on Facebook? Also when was the survey conducted?

It’s another step closer to Rugby Union, which is exactly what we don’t want. Just like the stupidity of the knee-jerk 7 tackle set rule when you grubber a ball dead or catch a ball on the fool in the in-goal.

The defensive team had their chance with the ball, they shouldn’t have advantages in their favour to strip balls. A 1 on 1 tackle is a fair contest... any more defenders join the tackle and it becomes an unfair contest.

User avatar
GreenMachine
Gary Coyne
Posts: 114
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: Are we premiership contenders?

Post by GreenMachine » August 12, 2019, 12:57 pm

CJ42 wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:48 pm
The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:00 pm
GreenMachine wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:53 am
The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:27 am
What poor video ref decision? I struggle to think of one.
The on ground "No Try" that was overturned as "Try" by the video ref when we were 12-6 up.

For mine, that overturn never happens - even rarer occurrence in big games where small decisions impact the games result.
It's one of my pet peeves when they overturn the on-field referee's call without clear cut evidence, it really grinds my goat, but... I think they actually got this one right. He's not playing at CNK at all.

I do note though, that several other posters are pointing out that that's not how they've called that in other games this year. I have to admit I only really watch the Raiders and Origin these days, so if that's the case then there's call to say we might have been unlucky.

To mine that's not a penalty, he's going for the ball and mistimes it, and that's never been a penalty. But IF they are indeed ruling that the other way this year, then it's baffling for the video ref to have overturned a live call of No Try.
generally if they've jumped to contest this year it's fine, but going under a player and not jumping with them, even with eyes on the ball, has been a penalty this year.
Spot on.

And you only need to look at the Tupou try from the cross field kick to see the difference between a 'genuine attempt to contest a ball' versus professional interference.

It should not have been awarded a try.

I bet between now and the end of the season we'll see this bite us again, and quite possibly, in the opposite direction!

User avatar
Seiffert82
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21650
Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
Favourite Player: Bay56

Re: Are we premiership contenders?

Post by Seiffert82 » August 12, 2019, 1:03 pm

Kryptonite wrote:
August 12, 2019, 9:54 am
BadnMean wrote:
August 11, 2019, 5:55 pm
Halves didn’t win that.

Tupou n Latrell gave our 3/4 line a bath.

Our one out rucking from the back 5 _ was_ lame n predictable.

Simonson is an solid FG winger- middle of the pack, no more. Rapana hasn’t recovered his best form n may not. CNK spilled 2 bombs. Toots missed s couple of big tackles n died with the ball on some big plays. My respect for those players shouldn’t cloud that they collectively were under par and outplayed for a premiership contender.

They squashed our strength.

We were outplayed across the backline, halves not so much.
If Croker can’t fix his defence, the Storm will get out to a 20 point lead in 10 mins like the round 2 start, I think we are still a rung or two down from the Storm and Roosters
It's very easy to see what you want to see.

User avatar
Woodgers
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8150
Joined: February 1, 2005, 10:34 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by Woodgers » August 12, 2019, 1:14 pm

pickles wrote:
August 12, 2019, 12:47 pm
Does anyone think that we have been training some things that we are not putting into games just yet? It is clear that to win big finals you need to be able to throw things at teams that they aren't able to defend but with the analysis being so on point once you have used a strategy teams will be looking for it.

The Raiders have been playing a very conservative style of football, predominantly hitting it up one pass off the ruck early on with a lot of our attack coming off the back of offloads or quick play of the balls. This was highlighted by the chooks coach when he suggested that he knew exactly what we will throw at them.

I'm wondering whether or not there are some plays that we are keeping in the bag to bring out in the big games. It just seems that we are playing within ourselves at the moment and I'm hoping that we have a plan for taking it up a notch.
Interesting you say that Pickles, I was pondering this last week while reading posts on here. There was a discussion about how to nullify Tedesco with the kicking game and commentary that we had to get that absolutely spot on and remove him from the game. My immediate thought was whatever our best plan is against the Roosters and their players, we need to keep it in the back pocket. We're definitely going to be there in September and so will they, i'm hoping that is exactly what we did. I don't think our best football yesterday for 2 points and any confidence gained out of it would be better for our long term chances. This talk of our struggles against the other top 4 or 5 sides is exactly where we want to be sitting as we move towards the finals series. We just have to stay healthy or the impact of any of that be minimised and we're a good shot this year.
We continue to **** about with blokes that are part of some fraternity. It's infuriating.

RedRaider
Steve Walters
Posts: 7354
Joined: March 3, 2007, 7:02 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by RedRaider » August 12, 2019, 1:23 pm

The Rickman wrote:
August 12, 2019, 11:44 am
Red, if your inside man screams out of the line and leaves a gaping hole you need to go with him and try and shut the play down. Otherwise he's just backpeddling and caught in no-man's land and Teddy burns him on the inside.
Before 2019 and our new structure and mobile backrow play, I would have agreed with you. But the picture clearly shows EW covering the gap, to the point where he is beside JC when JC has slid left and Teddy beat him on the outside. It is the first few minutes of the game. The players are not exhausted. The backrowers are coming across and EW is already beyond Jack to our defensive left as Teddy receives the ball well behind the Roosters three quarter line. Effectively where Jack would have been had he not rushed up. I think if JC trusts the structure then EW, followed by Tarps, cover the space to JC's right and that leaves no gap and equal numbers of defenders and attackers. JC rushing up created a gap on the outside which was exploited. Players should only rush up when there is a reasonable prospect of stopping the ball otherwise hold position.

User avatar
BJ
David Furner
Posts: 3673
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 21 V Roosters: Game Day

Post by BJ » August 12, 2019, 1:26 pm

Attacking players will soon adjust to the new strip interpretation. Wrestling and getting caught up in the ruck is a much bigger issue for the game. An issue that the refs haven’t addressed properly for a decade.

Changeovers of possession are better than the controlled ruck and controlled possession oriented game. I say leave it as it is.

Post Reply