2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

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

Moderator: GH Moderators

Who will win?

Raiders 13+
1
7%
Raiders 1-12
7
50%
Draw
0
No votes
Sharks 1-12
4
29%
Sharks 13+
2
14%
 
Total votes: 14

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 23066
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Northern Raider » September 2, 2019, 2:37 pm

Azza wrote:
September 2, 2019, 2:25 pm
Yep. It would be so boring and predictable if the Storm and Roosters make the GF. Someone else making a run would be super exciting for the game, and I hope it is us.
Unfortunately the season has played out like a preamble to Storm vs Roosters. Those two teams have kept their heads above the pack most of the season. The teams expected to challenge them haven't lived up to billing. Not so much the Bunnies but Panthers, Broncos, Sharks and Knights have fallen well way short of expectations.

At the start of the season you wouldn't have found too many people with Raiders, Sea Eagles and Eels making the finals but they ended up 3rd, 5th and 6th. Raiders might be the only team that can realistically make a run at it. Manly are shot without Turbo. Bunnies I'm not convinced by. Forget the rest.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
Azza
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6467
Joined: February 16, 2005, 10:12 am

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Azza » September 2, 2019, 2:43 pm

Yeah it's not great. Hopefully we can be the spanner in the works.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43590
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by The Rickman » September 2, 2019, 2:47 pm

Lui_Bon wrote:
September 2, 2019, 2:24 pm
Azza wrote:
September 2, 2019, 2:17 pm
Don't know. Ordinarily I'd say yes but we've been pretty bollocks at home recently.
The first weekend upset is the really important one - beat the roosters and they switch to the other side of the draw. Meaning that we might get a home prelim final against, logically, Souths and the roosters and storm get to bash each other up in Melbourne.
Yeah spot on. Provided we can win and the Storm also wins then they end up on the same side of the Prelim Final draw, that's MASSIVE for us.

The alternative means we have to go through both the Storm and the Roosters to even make the GF.
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
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126771
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » September 2, 2019, 3:21 pm

NRL.com power rankings

3. Canberra Raiders (4)
A great win on the road against the Sharks. Aidan Sezer stood up and you have to give credit where credit it is due. He probably hasn't convinced too many people this year that he can get the job done, but I'll put my hand up after being critical earlier in the year. He came up with a performance that will instil a lot of confidence in Ricky Stuart and the players that he can steer the team around.

Read more: https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/09/02/sow ... gh-it-out/

Canberra Raiders best and worst possible finish

Canberra Raiders (3rd, 32 points)
Best finish: 3rd
Worst finish: 5th

A thrilling golden-point win over Cronulla on the weekend kept Canberra in the top four but they aren't completely assured of a finals double chance. With fifth-placed Manly trailing the Green Machine by one win, a victory against the Warriors will ensure they finish third. South Sydney (fourth) are level on points but streets behind on for-and-against. Even if the Raiders lose and the Rabbitohs and Sea Eagles salute in their respective matches, Canberra's enviable points-differential total should solidify them in the four.

Read more: https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/09/02/nrl ... -round-25/

Gallery: Raiders v Sharks: https://www.gettyimages.com.au/photos/c ... st#license

https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/09 ... -v-sharks/

Raiders.com.au competition to vote for man of the match: https://www.raiders.com.au/competitions ... vote-motm/

Round 24 Moment of the week: Sezer's field goals: https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/09 ... eld-goals/

By the numbers: Raiders v Sharks: https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/09 ... -v-sharks/

Round 24: Roaming Elliott: https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/09 ... g-elliott/
Image

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126771
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » September 2, 2019, 3:26 pm

I wouldn't have thought the Raiders could realistically finish in fifth. Manly would need to win, and the Raiders would need to lose by a combination of more than 88 points... and Souths would need to win.
Image

User avatar
pacman
Jason Croker
Posts: 4393
Joined: July 18, 2005, 6:00 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by pacman » September 2, 2019, 3:45 pm

Good laugh from FB :lol:

Image

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43590
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by The Rickman » September 2, 2019, 3:46 pm

greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 3:26 pm
I wouldn't have thought the Raiders could realistically finish in fifth. Manly would need to win, and the Raiders would need to lose by a combination of more than 88 points... and Souths would need to win.
I guess if we rested half our **** team and got lapped by 50 it's a small possibility.
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
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 351
Joined: April 13, 2005, 2:22 pm
Favourite Player: Laurie Daley

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by GreenMachine » September 2, 2019, 4:28 pm

The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 3:46 pm
greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 3:26 pm
I wouldn't have thought the Raiders could realistically finish in fifth. Manly would need to win, and the Raiders would need to lose by a combination of more than 88 points... and Souths would need to win.
I guess if we rested half our **** team and got lapped by 50 it's a small possibility.
No chance.

Christmas Ape
Noa Nadruku
Posts: 170
Joined: April 29, 2007, 9:09 pm
Favourite Player: Ruben Wiki
Location: Perth, WA

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Christmas Ape » September 2, 2019, 4:33 pm

I couldn't watch the game yesterday so I'm watching the replay now and I don't know if it's already been answered but why was Horsburgh's try disallowed?
What's Sia supposed to do after he passes the ball? Start running toward the in-goal?

Christmas Ape
Noa Nadruku
Posts: 170
Joined: April 29, 2007, 9:09 pm
Favourite Player: Ruben Wiki
Location: Perth, WA

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Christmas Ape » September 2, 2019, 4:40 pm

Nevermind, I just answered my own question. Papa runs behind Sia. It only took me 7 looks, I'd be a terrific video ref.

User avatar
-TW-
Mal Meninga
Posts: 30386
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by -TW- » September 2, 2019, 4:40 pm

Clear the line, he can't just stop

Sent from my CPH1831 using Tapatalk


Billy Walker
John Ferguson
Posts: 2770
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Billy Walker » September 2, 2019, 4:41 pm

Christmas Ape wrote:
September 2, 2019, 4:33 pm
I couldn't watch the game yesterday so I'm watching the replay now and I don't know if it's already been answered but why was Horsburgh's try disallowed?
What's Sia supposed to do after he passes the ball? Start running toward the in-goal?
I thought it was tough but others on here have said it was the right call. There weren’t many replays shown and I have to say the bloke in the bunker must have had a hot date after the game because he didn’t take a second look at anything before make a call all game.

If your watching the replay can you try and get to the bottom of that feral bomb that was called to have bounced dead in goal but on replay appeared clearly in. I suspect the replay showed the second bounce but good if you could confirm what happened as a few of us were head scratching on that one. Pretty sure it was Hodgo who kicked it.

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126771
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » September 2, 2019, 4:58 pm

I think the interpretation stinks. Sure, if you're a decoy runner, you can't stop in the line. But the idea that a bloke who turns and offloads the ball then has to somehow disappear from his position on the field is downright ridiculous! If you asked my uncle or grandfather who were heavily involved in coaching and managing footy teams at just about every level when I was younger... they'd shake their heads at this interpretation... and say, you've got to be kidding.
Image

User avatar
BJ
David Furner
Posts: 3758
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by BJ » September 2, 2019, 5:08 pm

I think if the Refs had sent it up as a ‘try’ the video ref wouldn’t have reversed it.

I’d like the video ref to support the on field call more often than overrule decisions Willy nilly.

I have certainly seen many similar tries over the years get awarded without issue and the commentators make a big deal about what a great interchange of passing it was.

User avatar
Lui_Bon
David Furner
Posts: 3391
Joined: June 3, 2009, 4:07 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Lui_Bon » September 2, 2019, 5:10 pm

Billy Walker wrote:
September 2, 2019, 4:41 pm
I have to say the bloke in the bunker must have had a hot date after the game
Ashley Klein? Yeah right.
Image

User avatar
BJ
David Furner
Posts: 3758
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by BJ » September 2, 2019, 5:12 pm

Lui_Bon wrote:
Billy Walker wrote:
September 2, 2019, 4:41 pm
I have to say the bloke in the bunker must have had a hot date after the game
Ashley Klein? Yeah right.
Classic!

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 43590
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by The Rickman » September 2, 2019, 5:13 pm

greeneyed wrote:I think the interpretation stinks. Sure, if you're a decoy runner, you can't stop in the line. But the idea that a bloke who turns and offloads the ball then has to somehow disappear from his position on the field is downright ridiculous! If you asked my uncle or grandfather who were heavily involved in coaching and managing footy teams at just about every level when I was younger... they'd shake their heads at this interpretation... and say, you've got to be kidding.
They’d also say that you should thump your opposite number in the scrum too, so... there is 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

Billy Walker
John Ferguson
Posts: 2770
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Billy Walker » September 2, 2019, 5:16 pm

greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 4:58 pm
I think the interpretation stinks. Sure, if you're a decoy runner, you can't stop in the line. But the idea that a bloke who turns and offloads the ball then has to somehow disappear from his position on the field is downright ridiculous! If you asked my uncle or grandfather who were heavily involved in coaching and managing footy teams at just about every level when I was younger... they'd shake their heads at this interpretation... and say, you've got to be kidding.
I agree it’s a dumb interpretation. To take it to the extreme, what happens if a centre passes to the winger and on releasing the ball immediately impeads the cover defence coming across from reaching the winger? Players can’t disappear and if they are part of the play they shouldn’t have to. Decoys are a different story but it is a silly interpretation.

User avatar
pickles
Jason Croker
Posts: 4776
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by pickles » September 2, 2019, 5:27 pm

There wasn't a good replay of the Horsburgh try yesterday but having just watched it I can't agree with the decision. If Sia is a decoy runner who has stopped in the line the it is the right call every day of the week but given he passes the ball and is part of the play I think he has earned his right to be there as a ball carrier. I don't think the video ref went back far enough to realise that Sia had passed the ball, either that or Klein really wants to see the Hors nudei run at the end of the season!

On the other hand Sutton played the single longest advantage I have ever seen in rugby league, it was 2 or 3 tackles before he went back for the penalty! I didn't mind it at all and we didn't manage to take advantage but you don't see it often!

User avatar
papabear
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6156
Joined: August 27, 2007, 2:26 pm
Location: redfern

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by papabear » September 2, 2019, 5:34 pm

it was a rough call that imo would have gone our way if it wasnt sent up a try.

Keep in mind its the same peanut who sent up the right side which was clealy planted on the line (and looked worse in real time) a try.

also prior is on his left, he offloads out of the right hand and the space is because graham comes in to help tackle papalii. I would have been ok with the call if he pushed Sia out of the way or made a bit more effort then looking at sia slightly brushing him and throwing up his arms as if he has had his head taken off.

On another note, Jarrod Croker charging out of the line, I think is something we should look at, him and wighton seem to be on different pages defensively.

gergreg
Steve Walters
Posts: 7079
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by gergreg » September 2, 2019, 5:38 pm

While we're discussing decisions, and just stirring the pot here a little, how about that penalty 2 tackles after the late hit on Sezer. Can you imagine this place if .....

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Shoving it in your face since 2017

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126771
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » September 2, 2019, 5:47 pm

The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:13 pm
greeneyed wrote:I think the interpretation stinks. Sure, if you're a decoy runner, you can't stop in the line. But the idea that a bloke who turns and offloads the ball then has to somehow disappear from his position on the field is downright ridiculous! If you asked my uncle or grandfather who were heavily involved in coaching and managing footy teams at just about every level when I was younger... they'd shake their heads at this interpretation... and say, you've got to be kidding.
They’d also say that you should thump your opposite number in the scrum too, so... there is that
Now I know you're defending the NRL... I know I'm on the right track!
Image

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126771
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » September 2, 2019, 5:49 pm

gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:38 pm
While we're discussing decisions, and just stirring the pot here a little, how about that penalty 2 tackles after the late hit on Sezer. Can you imagine this place if .....

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
They did explain it on the broadcast. Graham Annesley went through the exact wording of the rule. There is absolutely no doubt about what the rule says and it was properly applied.
Image

gergreg
Steve Walters
Posts: 7079
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by gergreg » September 2, 2019, 5:55 pm

greeneyed wrote:
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:38 pm
While we're discussing decisions, and just stirring the pot here a little, how about that penalty 2 tackles after the late hit on Sezer. Can you imagine this place if .....

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
They did explain it on the broadcast. Graham Annesley went through the exact wording of the rule. There is absolutely no doubt about what the rule says and it was properly applied.
Yes I just watched it. Have you ever, in the whole time you have watched rugby league, seen that before?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Shoving it in your face since 2017

Billy Walker
John Ferguson
Posts: 2770
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Billy Walker » September 2, 2019, 5:55 pm

papabear wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:34 pm
it was a rough call that imo would have gone our way if it wasnt sent up a try.

Keep in mind its the same peanut who sent up the right side which was clealy planted on the line (and looked worse in real time) a try.

also prior is on his left, he offloads out of the right hand and the space is because graham comes in to help tackle papalii. I would have been ok with the call if he pushed Sia out of the way or made a bit more effort then looking at sia slightly brushing him and throwing up his arms as if he has had his head taken off.

On another note, Jarrod Croker charging out of the line, I think is something we should look at, him and wighton seem to be on different pages defensively.
Croker is now second in the NRL behind Anthony Don for try causes but according to the GH his defence cannot be looked at, questioned or discussed in anyway.

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126771
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » September 2, 2019, 5:57 pm

gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:55 pm
greeneyed wrote:
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:38 pm
While we're discussing decisions, and just stirring the pot here a little, how about that penalty 2 tackles after the late hit on Sezer. Can you imagine this place if .....

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
They did explain it on the broadcast. Graham Annesley went through the exact wording of the rule. There is absolutely no doubt about what the rule says and it was properly applied.
Yes I just watched it. Have you ever, in the whole time you have watched rugby league, seen that before?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
I can't point you to a particular instance off the top of my head... but it didn't surprise me at all.
Image

Christmas Ape
Noa Nadruku
Posts: 170
Joined: April 29, 2007, 9:09 pm
Favourite Player: Ruben Wiki
Location: Perth, WA

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Christmas Ape » September 2, 2019, 5:57 pm

I reckon it's a fair call. Sia offloads then Papa comes from left to right, running around the back of Sia causing Prior to change direction to make the tackle. It's an old fashioned shepherd.
The confusing bit was when Sutton sent it to the bunker he called Sia the "lead runner" which he clearly wasn't.

User avatar
Raider Azz
Jason Croker
Posts: 4051
Joined: January 7, 2005, 10:22 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Raider Azz » September 2, 2019, 5:58 pm

pickles wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:27 pm
There wasn't a good replay of the Horsburgh try yesterday but having just watched it I can't agree with the decision. If Sia is a decoy runner who has stopped in the line the it is the right call every day of the week but given he passes the ball and is part of the play I think he has earned his right to be there as a ball carrier. I don't think the video ref went back far enough to realise that Sia had passed the ball, either that or Klein really wants to see the Hors nudei run at the end of the season!

On the other hand Sutton played the single longest advantage I have ever seen in rugby league, it was 2 or 3 tackles before he went back for the penalty! I didn't mind it at all and we didn't manage to take advantage but you don't see it often!
That's literally the rule though. If it is foul play, it is the refs discreation when advantage has been played. He can wait all set to call a penalty if he wants. Completely different scenario than if it were a knock on.

User avatar
Raider Azz
Jason Croker
Posts: 4051
Joined: January 7, 2005, 10:22 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Raider Azz » September 2, 2019, 6:01 pm

greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:57 pm
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:55 pm
greeneyed wrote:
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:38 pm
While we're discussing decisions, and just stirring the pot here a little, how about that penalty 2 tackles after the late hit on Sezer. Can you imagine this place if .....

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
They did explain it on the broadcast. Graham Annesley went through the exact wording of the rule. There is absolutely no doubt about what the rule says and it was properly applied.
Yes I just watched it. Have you ever, in the whole time you have watched rugby league, seen that before?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
I can't point you to a particular instance off the top of my head... but it didn't surprise me at all.
People seem to be confusing advantage played after a mistake with advantage after foul play. Very very different scenarios. Think about the kind of advantage you get from kicking for touch/a conversion for goal compared to winning the feed of the scrum. It was absolutely fair that they went back and blew the penalty, and if it was against us I certaintly wouldn't be blowing up about it.

gergreg
Steve Walters
Posts: 7079
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by gergreg » September 2, 2019, 6:06 pm

Raider Azz wrote:
greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:57 pm
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:55 pm
greeneyed wrote:
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:38 pm
While we're discussing decisions, and just stirring the pot here a little, how about that penalty 2 tackles after the late hit on Sezer. Can you imagine this place if .....

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
They did explain it on the broadcast. Graham Annesley went through the exact wording of the rule. There is absolutely no doubt about what the rule says and it was properly applied.
Yes I just watched it. Have you ever, in the whole time you have watched rugby league, seen that before?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
I can't point you to a particular instance off the top of my head... but it didn't surprise me at all.
People seem to be confusing advantage played after a mistake with advantage after foul play. Very very different scenarios. Think about the kind of advantage you get from kicking for touch compared to winning the feed of the scrum. It was absolutely fair that they went back and blew the penalty, and if it was against us I certaintly wouldn't be blowing up about it.
I saw the same interpretation or explanation of the rule as GE did and also maybe you - from Annesley. I'm just asking if GE, or anybody has seen that before. I have never seen a referee go back that far - unless he has been tipped off by the bunker/VR.

I'd be pretty **** annoyed if the same thing happened to the Raiders.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Shoving it in your face since 2017

User avatar
Seiffert82
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21729
Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
Favourite Player: Bay56

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Seiffert82 » September 2, 2019, 6:39 pm

pacman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 3:45 pm
Good laugh from FB :lol:

Image
:lol:

Billy Walker
John Ferguson
Posts: 2770
Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Billy Walker » September 2, 2019, 6:45 pm

Seiffert82 wrote:
September 2, 2019, 6:39 pm
pacman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 3:45 pm
Good laugh from FB :lol:

Image
:lol:
I’d say that’s a bit unfair..... a squirrel can go at least 15mph

User avatar
Sid
Steve Walters
Posts: 7045
Joined: May 15, 2015, 8:47 pm
Favourite Player: Shannon Boyd
Location: Darwin, N.T.

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Sid » September 2, 2019, 6:55 pm

I still can’t believe Raiders kicked 3 field goals in a game, particularly given how much Raiders have struggled to kick one in the last few years.

5 field goals in a game is the most in the 1 point field goal era
Would have won Boogs - 2016, 2017, 2018

1 part green, 1 part machine

User avatar
Chicka's shoe
John Ferguson
Posts: 2410
Joined: May 23, 2007, 10:28 am

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Chicka's shoe » September 2, 2019, 7:10 pm

Christmas Ape wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:57 pm
I reckon it's a fair call. Sia offloads then Papa comes from left to right, running around the back of Sia causing Prior to change direction to make the tackle. It's an old fashioned shepherd.
The confusing bit was when Sutton sent it to the bunker he called Sia the "lead runner" which he clearly wasn't.
Well I'll be a monkey's uncle, hello old boy.
Image

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 126771
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by greeneyed » September 2, 2019, 7:19 pm

gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 6:06 pm
Raider Azz wrote:
greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:57 pm
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 5:55 pm
greeneyed wrote:
They did explain it on the broadcast. Graham Annesley went through the exact wording of the rule. There is absolutely no doubt about what the rule says and it was properly applied.
Yes I just watched it. Have you ever, in the whole time you have watched rugby league, seen that before?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
I can't point you to a particular instance off the top of my head... but it didn't surprise me at all.
People seem to be confusing advantage played after a mistake with advantage after foul play. Very very different scenarios. Think about the kind of advantage you get from kicking for touch compared to winning the feed of the scrum. It was absolutely fair that they went back and blew the penalty, and if it was against us I certaintly wouldn't be blowing up about it.
I saw the same interpretation or explanation of the rule as GE did and also maybe you - from Annesley. I'm just asking if GE, or anybody has seen that before. I have never seen a referee go back that far - unless he has been tipped off by the bunker/VR.

I'd be pretty **** annoyed if the same thing happened to the Raiders.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
But I don't understand why when that is what the rule clearly states.
Image

Post Reply