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

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, 7:21 pm

Chicka's shoe wrote:
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.
Hello there, Chicka.
I'm conversing with the supporters. Must be finals time!
I was stranded on Rottnest Island yesterday and missed the game. Awful turn of events.

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 25572
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by PigRickman » September 2, 2019, 7:21 pm

Credit where it's due. Gerg at least admits he'd be filthy about that call
And GE and Azz would too. They just dont have the stones to admit it.
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers and Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Matt wrote:
June 25, 2019, 9:29 pm
Reed Mahoney 9. Josh Hodgson ©
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

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, 7:23 pm

I can't see how anyone could be, given that is what the rule clearly states.
Image

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 25572
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by PigRickman » September 2, 2019, 7:26 pm

greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:23 pm
I can't see how anyone could be, given that is what the rule clearly states.
The rule is clearly stated about the obstruction Sia got pinged for and you're obviously filthy about that, so rules kind of matter to you when it suits you, and dont at all when it doesnt.

Gerg is right, i cant recall a time advantage has been played for that long... my FIL laughed about when we were watching, he said "i like that, but im a union boy, im used to advantage going for an age"
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers and Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Matt wrote:
June 25, 2019, 9:29 pm
Reed Mahoney 9. Josh Hodgson ©
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

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, 7:34 pm

PigRickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:26 pm
greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:23 pm
I can't see how anyone could be, given that is what the rule clearly states.
The rule is clearly stated about the obstruction Sia got pinged for and you're obviously filthy about that, so rules kind of matter to you when it suits you, and dont at all when it doesnt.

Gerg is right, i cant recall a time advantage has been played for that long... my FIL laughed about when we were watching, he said "i like that, but im a union boy, im used to advantage going for an age"
Does it? Quote me the rule...
Image

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, 7:37 pm

PigRickman wrote:Credit where it's due. Gerg at least admits he'd be filthy about that call
And GE and Azz would too. They just dont have the stones to admit it.
Don't ever change piggy.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk


User avatar
gangrenous
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9842
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by gangrenous » September 2, 2019, 7:38 pm

I’d be annoyed because it’s not generally how the game is refereed, despite the rule.

Having said that, I’d like to think through the implications a bit more but I’m open to the idea of that being the way they do it. Rugby League does have a bit of a problem with deliberate penalties when teams have a roll on. Sometimes the ref can’t win because the fans are upset he/she ignores a clear penalty, or in awarding the penalty he/she often kills a promising chance to score with the opponent on the back foot. I don’t really like union going back to infringements 3 days ago though.

I’m really torn on this one actually

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 25572
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by PigRickman » September 2, 2019, 8:13 pm

greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:34 pm
PigRickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:26 pm
greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:23 pm
I can't see how anyone could be, given that is what the rule clearly states.
The rule is clearly stated about the obstruction Sia got pinged for and you're obviously filthy about that, so rules kind of matter to you when it suits you, and dont at all when it doesnt.

Gerg is right, i cant recall a time advantage has been played for that long... my FIL laughed about when we were watching, he said "i like that, but im a union boy, im used to advantage going for an age"
Does it? Quote me the rule...

https://www.nrl.com/siteassets/operatio ... k-2019.pdf
Page 41 explains it pretty clearly, in this circumstance, Sia is to give "right of way" to defenders coming across to make a tackle. And that means, getting the **** out of the way. Sia is allowed to slow up to receieve a pass but he's metres in front of the ball, so is not in a position to recieve a pass, therefor the onus is on him to not impede a defender.

Sia passes the ball, stops in the line, and Papalii runs around behind Sia and into the gap that Prior is unable to defend in because Sia is in his way. Nothing else from that point matters. That's text book, page 1... or as it were, page 41 of the rule book.

edit: thats page 41 of the document, it's officially page 39 of the rule book. No idea why, im sure some style experts will be able to explain
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers and Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Matt wrote:
June 25, 2019, 9:29 pm
Reed Mahoney 9. Josh Hodgson ©
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

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, 8:31 pm

By the letter of the law no try for Corey and we get the advantage penalty.

Realistically, you only play the advantage for one further play, and either call the advantage play on or penalty there.

Realistically prior was not particularly interested in getting across so you can give the try.

Swings and round abouts.

One call which was laughable was the seven tackle set where I swear the ball was a metre from the dead ball line on the replay, they just gave it coz the Cronulla bloke was bitchinng like only Paul Gallen could.

Honestly the biggest downer in the last ten years of rugby league has been Melbourne losing that gf giving these useless muppets a grand final.

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, 8:32 pm

Also there bitching for crusher tackles was pathetic.

The if players lie down for a penalty and don’t get it and aren’t injured it should be a differential penalty the other way.

Hazza
Dean Lance
Posts: 814
Joined: March 1, 2016, 3:14 pm
Favourite Player: Adam Clydesdale

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Hazza » September 2, 2019, 8:34 pm

How bout Crokes confirming he slowed down deliberately (although he would say that wouldn't he). Hate to say I told ya so but.......

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 25572
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by PigRickman » September 2, 2019, 8:41 pm

papabear wrote:
September 2, 2019, 8:32 pm
Also there bitching for crusher tackles was pathetic.

The if players lie down for a penalty and don’t get it and aren’t injured it should be a differential penalty the other way.
Not one of those were legitimate crushers.
But how much do we want to complain about that? We're pests at laying down looking for crusher calls.
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers and Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Matt wrote:
June 25, 2019, 9:29 pm
Reed Mahoney 9. Josh Hodgson ©
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

User avatar
BadnMean
John Ferguson
Posts: 2759
Joined: May 13, 2013, 5:30 pm
Favourite Player: chicka

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by BadnMean » September 2, 2019, 8:42 pm

gangrenous wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:38 pm
I’d be annoyed because it’s not generally how the game is refereed, despite the rule.

Having said that, I’d like to think through the implications a bit more but I’m open to the idea of that being the way they do it. Rugby League does have a bit of a problem with deliberate penalties when teams have a roll on. Sometimes the ref can’t win because the fans are upset he/she ignores a clear penalty, or in awarding the penalty he/she often kills a promising chance to score with the opponent on the back foot. I don’t really like union going back to infringements 3 days ago though.

I’m really torn on this one actually Image
Not that hard. The ref can give an Advantage for 1 tackle after the infringement has occurred- so you get the moment the penalty is called (presuming play can go on) and one play after the foul, to go all out and score. If not, come back and it should be understood the ref can still give 10 in the bin for a deliberate foul in a try scoring opportunity or whatever, even after Advantage is played. That's simple enough and black and white enough to work in league.

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, 9:09 pm

PigRickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 8:41 pm
papabear wrote:
September 2, 2019, 8:32 pm
Also there bitching for crusher tackles was pathetic.

The if players lie down for a penalty and don’t get it and aren’t injured it should be a differential penalty the other way.
I’m not a fan when we do it either.

Same with our plodders doing a **** hit up then trying to play it four yards of the mark.

All that is just Bull that should see a turn over if possession in my book.
Not one of those were legitimate crushers.
But how much do we want to complain about that? We're pests at laying down looking for crusher calls.

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, 9:11 pm

gergreg wrote: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
Haha my thoughts exactly, Gerg

I hate Paul Gallen with the fire from a thousand suns, but even I had to agree with him asking the question about how long advantage is, and my first thoughts were “gee whiz, if that happened to us, Fergus and gangrenous wouldn’t sit down for a week!”
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
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, 9:14 pm

Hazza wrote:How bout Crokes confirming he slowed down deliberately (although he would say that wouldn't he). Hate to say I told ya so but.......
Is that true? Because I thought he slowed down at the time and watching it again today it certainly seemed like the case
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

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, 9:16 pm

gangrenous wrote:I’d be annoyed because it’s not generally how the game is refereed, despite the rule.

Having said that, I’d like to think through the implications a bit more but I’m open to the idea of that being the way they do it. Rugby League does have a bit of a problem with deliberate penalties when teams have a roll on. Sometimes the ref can’t win because the fans are upset he/she ignores a clear penalty, or in awarding the penalty he/she often kills a promising chance to score with the opponent on the back foot. I don’t really like union going back to infringements 3 days ago though.

I’m really torn on this one actually Image
I feel the same way. Sure, it's in the rulebook - although I didn't know it because it's never happened - and it's one thing that **** me. It's like they've made a decision in round 24 to start interpreting it that way, which I find incredible.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Shoving it in your face since 2017

Hazza
Dean Lance
Posts: 814
Joined: March 1, 2016, 3:14 pm
Favourite Player: Adam Clydesdale

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Hazza » September 2, 2019, 9:32 pm

The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:14 pm
Hazza wrote:How bout Crokes confirming he slowed down deliberately (although he would say that wouldn't he). Hate to say I told ya so but.......
Is that true? Because I thought he slowed down at the time and watching it again today it certainly seemed like the case
Yeah said to 'Roaming Elliott' he had the obstruction in mind so slowed down to ensure he didn't score.

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, 9:33 pm

PigRickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 8:13 pm
greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:34 pm
PigRickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:26 pm
greeneyed wrote:
September 2, 2019, 7:23 pm
I can't see how anyone could be, given that is what the rule clearly states.
The rule is clearly stated about the obstruction Sia got pinged for and you're obviously filthy about that, so rules kind of matter to you when it suits you, and dont at all when it doesnt.

Gerg is right, i cant recall a time advantage has been played for that long... my FIL laughed about when we were watching, he said "i like that, but im a union boy, im used to advantage going for an age"
Does it? Quote me the rule...

https://www.nrl.com/siteassets/operatio ... k-2019.pdf
Page 41 explains it pretty clearly, in this circumstance, Sia is to give "right of way" to defenders coming across to make a tackle. And that means, getting the **** out of the way. Sia is allowed to slow up to receieve a pass but he's metres in front of the ball, so is not in a position to recieve a pass, therefor the onus is on him to not impede a defender.

Sia passes the ball, stops in the line, and Papalii runs around behind Sia and into the gap that Prior is unable to defend in because Sia is in his way. Nothing else from that point matters. That's text book, page 1... or as it were, page 41 of the rule book.

edit: thats page 41 of the document, it's officially page 39 of the rule book. No idea why, im sure some style experts will be able to explain
I'm not sure that what is in the diagram is what happened on the field. In any event, the referees have ruled it that way. Personally, I think that rule is ridiculous. Players who actually have the ball should have a right to be at the point on the field where they released the ball. What else are they going to do? Turn into a pillar of salt? Seriously, what was Sia Soliola supposed to do in that circumstance? It isn't like he's a decoy runner, running an obstruction play. He's not an offside player that a player is running around behind. He's run up the ball, turned to offload. He can't help where the lateral Sharks defender has put himself. It isn't like he seriously attempted to do anything but pretend Soliola had obstructed him.
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, 9:33 pm

Hazza wrote:
The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:14 pm
Hazza wrote:How bout Crokes confirming he slowed down deliberately (although he would say that wouldn't he). Hate to say I told ya so but.......
Is that true? Because I thought he slowed down at the time and watching it again today it certainly seemed like the case
Yeah said to 'Roaming Elliott' he had the obstruction in mind so slowed down to ensure he didn't score.
Hahaha I **** KNEW it!!

In your faces afghfjfkrkkr and Billy Walker!!
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: 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, 9:35 pm

I’m all for playing advantage until the end of the set for any penalty. It would make teams defending their line think twice about giving away a penalty if the team was going to get the full set as well as a penalty at the end.

That said I have never seen an advantage played for that long unless a referee was tipped off about an infringement that was missed on field.

The NRL need to do something about the way teams give away penalties when defending their line but I hardly think the second last round of the season is time to make a stand!

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, 9:38 pm

The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:11 pm
gergreg wrote: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
Haha my thoughts exactly, Gerg

I hate Paul Gallen with the fire from a thousand suns, but even I had to agree with him asking the question about how long advantage is, and my first thoughts were “gee whiz, if that happened to us, Fergus and gangrenous wouldn’t sit down for a week!”
If that was your first thought, during the game, when the Raiders are about to potentially score, then you have a serious problem. You've been carrying on about this, Billy Walker style for months, and no doubt you'll continue. And then during the Grand Final, when the Raiders get a penalty, and they're about to win the game... your first thought will be... if that penalty against the Storm had been called against the Raiders, GE and gangrenous would be terribly upset!
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, 9:41 pm

Hazza wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:32 pm
The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:14 pm
Hazza wrote:How bout Crokes confirming he slowed down deliberately (although he would say that wouldn't he). Hate to say I told ya so but.......
Is that true? Because I thought he slowed down at the time and watching it again today it certainly seemed like the case
Yeah said to 'Roaming Elliott' he had the obstruction in mind so slowed down to ensure he didn't score.
It was a JOKE! https://www.raiders.com.au/news/2019/09 ... g-elliott/
Image

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 25572
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by PigRickman » September 2, 2019, 9:44 pm

Haha no, that diagram is not EXACTLY the situation that happened on the field, if they did that the rule book would be 900000 pages long, but it covers the situation perfectly. In black and white.

Sia was supposed to run through the defensive line to ensure he wasnt impeding a defender. He didnt and he did in fact impede a defender the chance to make a tackle. Prior couldnt seriously or not seriously attempt to do anything because a player from our team, not in possession, stopped in the middle of the defensive line and prevented him the chance to make a tackle.
It's black and white. Clear cut. No ifs. No buts. No interpretations. No question.
Simple.

As i said, you're perfectly ok with ignoring the rules when it suits and then trumpet the rules, despite no known precedent that aids us when it suits. That's why you always find faults with the referees. You're OK with the rules being enforced because it's in the rule book on a situation that no one can remember happening before because that's the rules AND IT WAS TO OUR ADVANTAGE... and you want to argue the toss about a rule that is also clear as day in the rule because it hurt us.

This encapsulates things in a way that is almost too perfect. I couldnt have dreamed up a better set of scenario's to highlight your lack of objectivity, even 24 hours after the events when emotions have subsided.
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers and Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Matt wrote:
June 25, 2019, 9:29 pm
Reed Mahoney 9. Josh Hodgson ©
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

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, 9:46 pm

The Rickman wrote:
gergreg wrote: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
Haha my thoughts exactly, Gerg

I hate Paul Gallen with the fire from a thousand suns, but even I had to agree with him asking the question about how long advantage is, and my first thoughts were “gee whiz, if that happened to us, Fergus and gangrenous wouldn’t sit down for a week!”
I thought to myself he makes a fair point there

Sent from my CPH1831 using Tapatalk


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, 9:50 pm

-TW- wrote:
The Rickman wrote:
gergreg wrote: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
Haha my thoughts exactly, Gerg

I hate Paul Gallen with the fire from a thousand suns, but even I had to agree with him asking the question about how long advantage is, and my first thoughts were “gee whiz, if that happened to us, Fergus and gangrenous wouldn’t sit down for a week!”
I thought to myself he makes a fair point there

Sent from my CPH1831 using Tapatalk
Yeah, me too
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, 9:51 pm

PigRickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:44 pm
Haha no, that diagram is not EXACTLY the situation that happened on the field, if they did that the rule book would be 900000 pages long, but it covers the situation perfectly. In black and white.

Sia was supposed to run through the defensive line to ensure he wasnt impeding a defender. He didnt and he did in fact impede a defender the chance to make a tackle. Prior couldnt seriously or not seriously attempt to do anything because a player from our team, not in possession, stopped in the middle of the defensive line and prevented him the chance to make a tackle.
It's black and white. Clear cut. No ifs. No buts. No interpretations. No question.
Simple.

As i said, you're perfectly ok with ignoring the rules when it suits and then trumpet the rules, despite no known precedent that aids us when it suits. That's why you always find faults with the referees. You're OK with the rules being enforced because it's in the rule book on a situation that no one can remember happening before because that's the rules AND IT WAS TO OUR ADVANTAGE... and you want to argue the toss about a rule that is also clear as day in the rule because it hurt us.

This encapsulates things in a way that is almost too perfect. I couldnt have dreamed up a better set of scenario's to highlight your lack of objectivity, even 24 hours after the events when emotions have subsided.
What, he was supposed to run into the in goal when play was still going on? That’s ridiculous.

This whole debate is ridiculous.

Am I not allowed to agree, or disagree with a rule? No I’m allowed to agree or disagree with any rule I like.

Am I allowed to agree or disagree with a ruling? Yes I am. I’ve actually said in both of these cases, the rules were enforced or probably enforced. The penalty on the late hit on a Sezer is black and white. The obstruction call was not. But I actually, said... well that’s how they’ve enforced it.

What’s the big deal?

Like you’re never anything but fully “objective” in any case? You twist stuff all the time!
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, 9:57 pm

The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:50 pm
-TW- wrote:
The Rickman wrote:
gergreg wrote: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
Haha my thoughts exactly, Gerg

I hate Paul Gallen with the fire from a thousand suns, but even I had to agree with him asking the question about how long advantage is, and my first thoughts were “gee whiz, if that happened to us, Fergus and gangrenous wouldn’t sit down for a week!”
I thought to myself he makes a fair point there

Sent from my CPH1831 using Tapatalk
Yeah, me too
Yeah, I didn’t.
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, 10:08 pm

pickles wrote:I’m all for playing advantage until the end of the set for any penalty. It would make teams defending their line think twice about giving away a penalty if the team was going to get the full set as well as a penalty at the end.

That said I have never seen an advantage played for that long unless a referee was tipped off about an infringement that was missed on field.

The NRL need to do something about the way teams give away penalties when defending their line but I hardly think the second last round of the season is time to make a stand!
Totally agree Pickles, but round 24 isn't the time to start changing how the intricacies of the game are interpreted. Like I said earlier I'd be ropeable if it happens to us in the semi-finals.

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, 10:20 pm

gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 10:08 pm
pickles wrote:I’m all for playing advantage until the end of the set for any penalty. It would make teams defending their line think twice about giving away a penalty if the team was going to get the full set as well as a penalty at the end.

That said I have never seen an advantage played for that long unless a referee was tipped off about an infringement that was missed on field.

The NRL need to do something about the way teams give away penalties when defending their line but I hardly think the second last round of the season is time to make a stand!
Totally agree Pickles, but round 24 isn't the time to start changing how the intricacies of the game are interpreted. Like I said earlier I'd be ropeable if it happens to us in the semi-finals.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Hold on, the NRL hasn’t changed their interpretation of this rule. And I don’t think they should.

The rule says that in a case of foul play, which we saw on Sunday, the referees can play advantage until the end of the set and then go back if there is none. This actually a good rule, isn’t it? See if the disadvantaged team scores, if not, they go back for the penalty. You shouldn’t allow foul play to go unpenalised.

In the case of other infringements, I like the current interpretation. Limited advantage played. Once they’ve used the advantage, that’s cancelled.

No one is talking about changing the interpretation on the eve of the finals. These are the established rules and interpretations.
Image

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, 10:30 pm

The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:33 pm
Hazza wrote:
The Rickman wrote:
September 2, 2019, 9:14 pm
Hazza wrote:How bout Crokes confirming he slowed down deliberately (although he would say that wouldn't he). Hate to say I told ya so but.......
Is that true? Because I thought he slowed down at the time and watching it again today it certainly seemed like the case
Yeah said to 'Roaming Elliott' he had the obstruction in mind so slowed down to ensure he didn't score.
Hahaha I **** KNEW it!!

In your faces afghfjfkrkkr and Billy Walker!!
It crossed my mind.
Our Captain is a smart bloke and chances are on video review they look at an obstruction.

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, 10:39 pm

greeneyed wrote:
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 10:08 pm
pickles wrote:I’m all for playing advantage until the end of the set for any penalty. It would make teams defending their line think twice about giving away a penalty if the team was going to get the full set as well as a penalty at the end.

That said I have never seen an advantage played for that long unless a referee was tipped off about an infringement that was missed on field.

The NRL need to do something about the way teams give away penalties when defending their line but I hardly think the second last round of the season is time to make a stand!
Totally agree Pickles, but round 24 isn't the time to start changing how the intricacies of the game are interpreted. Like I said earlier I'd be ropeable if it happens to us in the semi-finals.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Hold on, the NRL hasn’t changed their interpretation of this rule. And I don’t think they should.

The rule says that in a case of foul play, which we saw on Sunday, the referees can play advantage until the end of the set and then go back if there is none. This actually a good rule, isn’t it? See if the disadvantaged team scores, if not, they go back for the penalty. You shouldn’t allow foul play to go unpenalised.

In the case of other infringements, I like the current interpretation. Limited advantage played. Once they’ve used the advantage, that’s cancelled.

No one is talking about changing the interpretation on the eve of the finals. These are the established rules and interpretations.
I’ve said I think it is good but i can’t recall a single other time when a 3 tackle advantage has been played in a similar situation. It doesn’t mean that it isn’t following the rules but to argue that’s the current interpretation is a bit far fetched.

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, 10:40 pm

pickles wrote:
September 2, 2019, 10:39 pm
greeneyed wrote:
gergreg wrote:
September 2, 2019, 10:08 pm
pickles wrote:I’m all for playing advantage until the end of the set for any penalty. It would make teams defending their line think twice about giving away a penalty if the team was going to get the full set as well as a penalty at the end.

That said I have never seen an advantage played for that long unless a referee was tipped off about an infringement that was missed on field.

The NRL need to do something about the way teams give away penalties when defending their line but I hardly think the second last round of the season is time to make a stand!
Totally agree Pickles, but round 24 isn't the time to start changing how the intricacies of the game are interpreted. Like I said earlier I'd be ropeable if it happens to us in the semi-finals.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Hold on, the NRL hasn’t changed their interpretation of this rule. And I don’t think they should.

The rule says that in a case of foul play, which we saw on Sunday, the referees can play advantage until the end of the set and then go back if there is none. This actually a good rule, isn’t it? See if the disadvantaged team scores, if not, they go back for the penalty. You shouldn’t allow foul play to go unpenalised.

In the case of other infringements, I like the current interpretation. Limited advantage played. Once they’ve used the advantage, that’s cancelled.

No one is talking about changing the interpretation on the eve of the finals. These are the established rules and interpretations.
I’ve said I think it is good but i can’t recall a single other time when a 3 tackle advantage has been played in a similar situation. It doesn’t mean that it isn’t following the rules but to argue that’s the current interpretation is a bit far fetched.
I don’t agree, because I’ve seen it before. And it’s not just an interpretation, it’s a black and white rule... if you haven’t watched this video from the NRL today, it explains: https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/09/02/gra ... -round-24/
Image

Cranky Old Man
Chris O'Sullivan
Posts: 919
Joined: February 12, 2013, 11:11 pm
Favourite Player: Sam Backo

Re: 2019 Rd 24 V Sharks: Game Day

Post by Cranky Old Man » September 2, 2019, 10:41 pm

Its nearly 40 years since I got my refs ticket but I don't remember the Soliola rule at all. I don't dispute that it now a rule now, or even back then. But it does seem nonsensical a bit, and I'm not whining because it went against us in this instance. I just don't believe that a player who has partaken in a passing rush and no longer has possession of the ball should have to remove himself from the vicinity of the action in order to give untrammelled access to any and all defenders however unlikely or likely they are to effect a tackle. A more sensible rule would allow him to continue in support of the play unless he has to change direction which might bring him into a blocking position against a defender.
That current rule could make it dicey for any player running too close to a dummy half who has moved forward in front of a stationary marker.

The foul play advantage i am completely happy with, I only wish it was applied more consistently. (There is that word again!)

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, 10:45 pm

Cranky Old Man wrote:
September 2, 2019, 10:41 pm
Its nearly 40 years since I got my refs ticket but I don't remember the Soliola rule at all. I don't dispute that it now a rule now, or even back then. But it does seem nonsensical a bit, and I'm not whining because it went against us in this instance. I just don't believe that a player who has partaken in a passing rush and no longer has possession of the ball should have to remove himself from the vicinity of the action in order to give untrammelled access to any and all defenders however unlikely or likely they are to effect a tackle. A more sensible rule would allow him to continue in support of the play unless he has to change direction which might bring him into a blocking position against a defender.
That current rule could make it dicey for any player running too close to a dummy half who has moved forward in front of a stationary marker.

The foul play advantage i am completely happy with, I only wish it was applied more consistently. (There is that word again!)
Maybe because I’m getting to be a cranky old man too... I agree with you! :lol:
Image

Post Reply