2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

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

Moderator: GH Moderators

Who will win?

Raiders 13+
3
33%
Raiders 1-12
5
56%
Draw
0
No votes
Warriors 1-12
1
11%
Warriors 13+
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 9

User avatar
afgtnk
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8751
Joined: April 7, 2007, 1:45 am

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by afgtnk »

Greedysmurf wrote: March 29, 2021, 6:26 pm
greeneyed wrote: March 29, 2021, 2:35 pm Canberra Raiders were robbed - NRL football boss Graham Annesley admits crucial Warriors try was scored from a forward pass
The NRL is a bloody joke.

If you watch the whole presser, a minute after Annesley gets done being mealy mouthed about camera angles, etc, he shows the Cowboys obstruction confidently stating it was a penalty because the support runner was in front of the ball carrier. You sure on that Graham? it could be a camera angle, the support runner could very well have been behind the ball carrier.

On the technology front, how long does it take? The NFL has had a virtual 1st down line on the field for a decade at least, That's all you need, superimpose a straight line, forward or not?
Yeah - more technology

That'll solve it and make people happy!
raiderskater
Jason Croker
Posts: 4130
Joined: July 26, 2015, 8:24 pm
Favourite Player: Croker, Cotric, Sezer
Location: The Land of Lime Green

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by raiderskater »

On viewing the replay, the Rapana break downfield after which not a single Warriors player - not event the marker! - was onside, which didn't even get a six again waved, was almost as egregious. The commentators were genuinely flabbergasted when that wasn't called.
And to all the people who doubted me, hello to them as well. - Mark Webber, Raiders Ballboy and Unluckiest F1 Driver Ever

I'm attacking in the right way, instead of just...attacking in the general direction. - Max Aaron (also eerily apropos for the Green Machine)
User avatar
gergreg
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9195
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by gergreg »

Greedysmurf wrote:
greeneyed wrote: March 29, 2021, 2:35 pm Canberra Raiders were robbed - NRL football boss Graham Annesley admits crucial Warriors try was scored from a forward pass
The NRL is a bloody joke.

If you watch the whole presser, a minute after Annesley gets done being mealy mouthed about camera angles, etc, he shows the Cowboys obstruction confidently stating it was a penalty because the support runner was in front of the ball carrier. You sure on that Graham? it could be a camera angle, the support runner could very well have been behind the ball carrier.

On the technology front, how long does it take? The NFL has had a virtual 1st down line on the field for a decade at least, That's all you need, superimpose a straight line, forward or not?
One thing I absolutely loathe is obstruction. This outside shoulder nonsense. Why isn't it considered an obstruction when a defender on the inside shoulder of the blocker is impeded. The defender is directly behind the receiver of the ball, depending on the angle. I've long held the belief that a player can also be obstructed simply because their line of sight is obstructed.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Shoving it in your face since 2017
User avatar
Greedysmurf
Dean Lance
Posts: 804
Joined: April 6, 2008, 5:50 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: London, UK

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by Greedysmurf »

afgtnk wrote: March 29, 2021, 7:48 pm
Greedysmurf wrote: March 29, 2021, 6:26 pm
greeneyed wrote: March 29, 2021, 2:35 pm Canberra Raiders were robbed - NRL football boss Graham Annesley admits crucial Warriors try was scored from a forward pass
The NRL is a bloody joke.

If you watch the whole presser, a minute after Annesley gets done being mealy mouthed about camera angles, etc, he shows the Cowboys obstruction confidently stating it was a penalty because the support runner was in front of the ball carrier. You sure on that Graham? it could be a camera angle, the support runner could very well have been behind the ball carrier.

On the technology front, how long does it take? The NFL has had a virtual 1st down line on the field for a decade at least, That's all you need, superimpose a straight line, forward or not?
Yeah - more technology

That'll solve it and make people happy!
If they make it available as another piece of kit for the bunker to refer to when reviewing a try what's the problem? I'm not suggesting it gets used in general play, but it would hopefully catch a few of the "last pass a meter forward" problems. Having said that with the stupid backwards out of the hands BS approach, even a virtual straight line would be open to interpretation.
User avatar
BadnMean
Jason Croker
Posts: 4416
Joined: May 13, 2013, 5:30 pm
Favourite Player: chicka

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by BadnMean »

You can't use a straight line on the field to decide a forward pass. Physics dictates a ball thrown by a player running forward will actually almost always travel forward, even off "good" passes and even if thrown backward over your head.



That's why they went to "backward out of the hands" or backward motion or whatever it is these days.
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 135048
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by greeneyed »

Forward pass technology trial 'not far off' as Annesley concedes costly Warriors try error that cost the Canberra Raiders the match

Graham Annesley has conceded the Warriors scored a crucial try from a forward pass against Canberra and said the NRL plans to trial technology to eliminate such errors.

While the NRL head of football stressed that technology to determine forward passes won't be used in a 2021 Telstra Premiership match, he said it could be tested in a training session sometime this year.

Read more:https://www.nrl.com/news/2021/03/29/for ... try-error/

‘It was a forward pass’: NRL ‘hold hands up’ over Warriors blunder that left Ricky Stuart fuming: https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-pr ... e9fa280c74
Image
User avatar
BJ
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5311
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm

2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by BJ »

If Nikorima’s pass went backwards out of the hand before floating forwards with momentum, my high school physics suggests for the ball to travel that far forward he was running at 8090 kmph.

He’s pretty quick off the mark however, so I expect that Annesley expects the officials factored that in.
User avatar
Seiffert82
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24371
Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm
Favourite Player: Bay56

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by Seiffert82 »

The thing that gets me with this one was that Perenara was in the perfect position to call it, he knew it was forward, he even stopped at the point it was passed, but because the useless touch judges didn't give him the reassurance, he didn't pull it up.
User avatar
Greedysmurf
Dean Lance
Posts: 804
Joined: April 6, 2008, 5:50 pm
Favourite Player: Mal Meninga
Location: London, UK

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by Greedysmurf »

BadnMean wrote: March 30, 2021, 5:54 am You can't use a straight line on the field to decide a forward pass. Physics dictates a ball thrown by a player running forward will actually almost always travel forward, even off "good" passes and even if thrown backward over your head.



That's why they went to "backward out of the hands" or backward motion or whatever it is these days.
I've seen that video before, and particularly the over the head is a pretty disingenuous example if you ask me. I personally think forward pass should be any time the ball travels forward in relation to the ground. The passer simply needs to give it enough backwards momentum to ensure that doesn't happen. It's an old school view, and I'll no doubt get shouted down on it. But Meh.
The Nickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 46237
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by The Nickman »

gangrenous wrote: March 29, 2021, 6:36 pm
The Nickman wrote:
greeneyed wrote: March 29, 2021, 4:56 pm
Raiders666 wrote: March 29, 2021, 4:16 pm Injuries cost us the game...Not the ref
Injuries probably cost us a handsome win. Given injuries occurred, an incorrect call from the referee ended up costing us the win.
By that logic you could also say Jordan Rapana failing to ground the football cost us the win too.
You might.

It might also be pointed out that one of those is a legitimate part of the sport, while the other is a misapplication of the rules of the game. So they’re not really the same are they?
You might also point out that the referees making mistakes is a legitimate part of ANY sport, they're not perfect either.
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
The Nickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 46237
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by The Nickman »

Greedysmurf wrote: March 30, 2021, 8:53 am
BadnMean wrote: March 30, 2021, 5:54 am You can't use a straight line on the field to decide a forward pass. Physics dictates a ball thrown by a player running forward will actually almost always travel forward, even off "good" passes and even if thrown backward over your head.



That's why they went to "backward out of the hands" or backward motion or whatever it is these days.
I've seen that video before, and particularly the over the head is a pretty disingenuous example if you ask me. I personally think forward pass should be any time the ball travels forward in relation to the ground. The passer simply needs to give it enough backwards momentum to ensure that doesn't happen. It's an old school view, and I'll no doubt get shouted down on it. But Meh.
You won't get "shouted down" (how do you even DO that on a forum?), but you are wrong.
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
BJ
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5311
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by BJ »

So NRL have introduced a new rule for an 18th man if three players have been ruled out via HIA.

I don’t think they’ve actually solved the problem with this rule change. 2 HIA maybe would have been an improvement.
User avatar
Finchy
Brett Mullins
Posts: 1078
Joined: March 30, 2008, 9:59 pm

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by Finchy »

BJ wrote: March 30, 2021, 4:32 pm So NRL have introduced a new rule for an 18th man if three players have been ruled out via HIA.

I don’t think they’ve actually solved the problem with this rule change. 2 HIA maybe would have been an improvement.
Won't come into effect for another fortnight. I doubt it'll get used often (if ever) if it's only for players lost through HIA. People were using the last Raiders game as an example for why an 18th man is needed, but even then we couldn't have fielded an 18th man as we only lost two players to HIA.
User avatar
Rick
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6393
Joined: August 11, 2008, 3:56 pm
Favourite Player: Daley
Location: Darwin

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by Rick »

Finchy wrote:
BJ wrote: March 30, 2021, 4:32 pm So NRL have introduced a new rule for an 18th man if three players have been ruled out via HIA.

I don’t think they’ve actually solved the problem with this rule change. 2 HIA maybe would have been an improvement.
Won't come into effect for another fortnight. I doubt it'll get used often (if ever) if it's only for players lost through HIA. People were using the last Raiders game as an example for why an 18th man is needed, but even then we couldn't have fielded an 18th man as we only lost two players to HIA.
Can guarantee if the rule was in place last week that Scott would have “suffered a head knock” and would have been interchanged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
zim
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8753
Joined: July 8, 2015, 3:38 pm
Favourite Player: Past: Brett Mullins
Present: Elliot Whitehead
Location: Sydney

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by zim »

"Knock yourself out mate."
"Thanks for the vote of confidence Betty."
"No mate, stick wants you to knock yourself out."
User avatar
Finchy
Brett Mullins
Posts: 1078
Joined: March 30, 2008, 9:59 pm

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by Finchy »

Rick wrote: March 30, 2021, 4:48 pm
Finchy wrote:
BJ wrote: March 30, 2021, 4:32 pm So NRL have introduced a new rule for an 18th man if three players have been ruled out via HIA.

I don’t think they’ve actually solved the problem with this rule change. 2 HIA maybe would have been an improvement.
Won't come into effect for another fortnight. I doubt it'll get used often (if ever) if it's only for players lost through HIA. People were using the last Raiders game as an example for why an 18th man is needed, but even then we couldn't have fielded an 18th man as we only lost two players to HIA.
Can guarantee if the rule was in place last week that Scott would have “suffered a head knock” and would have been interchanged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But don't they have to fail their HIA after being assessed by an independent doctor? All good faking it to get subbed initially, but I assume you would then need to fake it for the doc to rule you out as well.
User avatar
BadnMean
Jason Croker
Posts: 4416
Joined: May 13, 2013, 5:30 pm
Favourite Player: chicka

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by BadnMean »

Greedysmurf wrote: March 30, 2021, 8:53 am
BadnMean wrote: March 30, 2021, 5:54 am You can't use a straight line on the field to decide a forward pass. Physics dictates a ball thrown by a player running forward will actually almost always travel forward, even off "good" passes and even if thrown backward over your head.



That's why they went to "backward out of the hands" or backward motion or whatever it is these days.
I've seen that video before, and particularly the over the head is a pretty disingenuous example if you ask me. I personally think forward pass should be any time the ball travels forward in relation to the ground. The passer simply needs to give it enough backwards momentum to ensure that doesn't happen. It's an old school view, and I'll no doubt get shouted down on it. But Meh.
Yeah every single pass thrown by a fast moving winger would be ruled forward- even when they go to ridic lengths to throw it 2m backwards. The science is so clear they changed the wording years ago.

"Looks backward" when everyone is running forward and actually not forward are two very different things. They aren't even travelling half the pace a top NRL player would be moving in those videos- so the forward error would be even more magnified. Note the amount of forward passes that are called if the ball runner is suddenly stopped/stops for some reason or the pass occurs right on a fueld marking line- the physics issues becomes more obvious.
User avatar
BadnMean
Jason Croker
Posts: 4416
Joined: May 13, 2013, 5:30 pm
Favourite Player: chicka

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by BadnMean »

The Nickman wrote: March 30, 2021, 10:07 am
You might also point out that the referees making mistakes is a legitimate part of ANY sport, they're not perfect either.
Yep.

Our best players make a poor decision or two, a misread and maybe a skill error or two per game. Refs will too.
User avatar
-TW-
Mal Meninga
Posts: 32596
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by -TW- »

BadnMean wrote:
The Nickman wrote: March 30, 2021, 10:07 am
You might also point out that the referees making mistakes is a legitimate part of ANY sport, they're not perfect either.
Yep.

Our best players make a poor decision or two, a misread and maybe a skill error or two per game. Refs will too.
This was the argument for 2 refs back the late 2000s.

The speed of the game was making refs make **** calls out of pure fatigue

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

User avatar
BadnMean
Jason Croker
Posts: 4416
Joined: May 13, 2013, 5:30 pm
Favourite Player: chicka

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by BadnMean »

-TW- wrote: March 30, 2021, 5:13 pm
BadnMean wrote:
The Nickman wrote: March 30, 2021, 10:07 am
You might also point out that the referees making mistakes is a legitimate part of ANY sport, they're not perfect either.
Yep.

Our best players make a poor decision or two, a misread and maybe a skill error or two per game. Refs will too.
This was the argument for 2 refs back the late 2000s.

The speed of the game was making refs make **** calls out of pure fatigue

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
I'm ok with one ref despite fatigue. I think at least the players learn to deal with the devil they have, instead of trying to play to two different interpretations.

I commented on it recently and for years- I hate the amount of emphasis ref decisions get in commentary and media in general. Most things shrugged at as "50/50 move on" at the ground become needless negativity in a telecast.

And junior leagues/refs amplify it horrendously to the grassroots. League isn't alone in that, but to grow the game, improve that aspect.
raiderskater
Jason Croker
Posts: 4130
Joined: July 26, 2015, 8:24 pm
Favourite Player: Croker, Cotric, Sezer
Location: The Land of Lime Green

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by raiderskater »

Rick wrote: March 30, 2021, 4:48 pm
Finchy wrote:
BJ wrote: March 30, 2021, 4:32 pm So NRL have introduced a new rule for an 18th man if three players have been ruled out via HIA.

I don’t think they’ve actually solved the problem with this rule change. 2 HIA maybe would have been an improvement.
Won't come into effect for another fortnight. I doubt it'll get used often (if ever) if it's only for players lost through HIA. People were using the last Raiders game as an example for why an 18th man is needed, but even then we couldn't have fielded an 18th man as we only lost two players to HIA.
Can guarantee if the rule was in place last week that Scott would have “suffered a head knock” and would have been interchanged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If Curtis was in as much pain as they say, and knew he had the option, this might have had the unintended consequence of him going "oh, thank ****" and promptly smashing himself into the goal post.
And to all the people who doubted me, hello to them as well. - Mark Webber, Raiders Ballboy and Unluckiest F1 Driver Ever

I'm attacking in the right way, instead of just...attacking in the general direction. - Max Aaron (also eerily apropos for the Green Machine)
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 30140
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by Botman »

If that option was available, I would absolutely instruct him as a coach to charge in for a tackle hit the deck and we'll figure it out from there
That's part of why i've pulled about from emergency replacement options, there is avenues for gaming the system

where as an extended bench with same number of interchanges, just provided the adaquate level of flexibility and use in game as you see fit. If you mismanage that bench situation then the questions need to be leveled at the coach.
CREATE PROCEDURE BotMan_Post AS
SELECT * FROM Previous_Post
EXEC quote_post
WHERE UserName = 'Aknalkfgnaa' OR 'Yeah Raiders' OR 'Billy B'
EXEC RAND(good_grief; cheak_notes; uh82cit;)

GO;
User avatar
Lui_Bon
David Furner
Posts: 3631
Joined: June 3, 2009, 4:07 pm

Re: 2021 Rd 3 V Warriors: Game Day

Post by Lui_Bon »

If Curtis Scott was that damaged, and I'm sure he was, any opinions on just replacing him with Starling in the same position? Or Starling to the wing, Bailey into the centres?

At least it would have put Hodgson in charge on those last couple of sets...
Post Reply