Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

Tigerbenb said:
Cmon lads no more Galvin chats, keystrokes, wasted time. It’s done and dusted , move on, closure complete. Lets have a positive week in this little forum, life, spring in the step for tomorrow- the Monday

Tigers , that’s what we are here for
Click to expand...
I almost felt a bit sorry for Dogs (almost): not only did they have to explain why they were out-muscled and out-disciplined by one of the lower sides (Dogs had not yet lost to a team in the bottom 9 of the comp) but they had to spend half the press conference talking about Lachie Galvout and why he was basically invisible for the match.
 
Weeks after signing a new contract with the Wests Tigers for the 2026 season,Charlie Murray has reportedly been made available and offered to multiple teams, casting doubt over his future.

One of the feel-good stories of the season at the Wests Tigers, Murray made his NRL debut just under two months ago after being brought down to Sydney at the beginning of the year on a train-and-trial contract.

 
batboy said:
Surely you’re not for real?
One was a send off because the attacker was hit high with force, the other wasn’t because the attacker slipped into the contact.
Click to expand...
That would be fine if that was the consistent approach and all the fans and commentators could be on board.

But that's not how it's consistently applied.

We can all easily think back to the obvious case of Suaalii in Origin where Reece Walsh slipped and Suaalii levelled him. Walsh didn't slip as much as May did yesterday, but there were definitely extenuating circumstances.

I was of the understanding in 2025 that head contact with the shoulder was personally punishable (i.e. not just a penalty) in all circumstances, not just based on a sliding scale of how much of an accident it is.

You can easily make another argument that Seyfarth made accidental contact and the guy he hit was not seriously injured, so he should have stayed on, but Crichton knocked his opponent into yesterday and should have gone off.

Personally I would make an argument that the punishment should match the HIA outcome. If you hit a guy high, not a clear accident, then if he goes off for an HIA you go off as well. Maybe even extend it as far as: if he doesn't come back on, neither do you. HIA assessment is independent now, right, so it can't be gamed by the clubs. When they stop play to remove a guy for HIA from illegal contact, the offender goes off too and can't return until the HIA 15 min period has ended.
 
Vicious said:
It’s an easy solution, re-sign Doueihi as our regular 7, Latu to develop while being our regular number 14, so he’s still playing valuable NRL minutes every week and keeping the pressure on Doueihi and Luai to perform.
I could be wrong, but I don’t think Latu has a big ego and I think he’s happy to bide his time as our regular number 14 and help our team progress in the right direction.
Click to expand...

I don’t get how Latu is going to “develop” as a half by playing a different postion ? Either play him there or play him somewhere else with a longer term strategy in mind …
 
TigerSkins05 said:
Despite looking innocent enough, news.com.au can reveal the celebration was actually an offensive gesture known as ‘the Khod’.

But the ‘Khod gesture’ which is done by pointing a straight hand to the sky and wiggling the middle finger down towards the palm, translates to “f*** you”.

It is a gesture that NRL superfan Jean-Claude Bitar has shown fans and players on social media, teaching people how to flip off people the Lebanese way.

“So what you’ve got to do is put your hand up like you are giving them a high five. Then put this finger down (the middle finger) and point it at them and go ‘Khod’,” Bitar says in one clip.
Click to expand...

Oh no,.. outrageous..lol

Nothing will happen
 
crazycat said:
That really pissed me off.

I mean sure, both shots were high and called right. But why do we get 10 in the bin and the dogs get a penalty?

It did not hurt us, in the end it boosted our points differental for what it's worth. Still made no sense.
Click to expand...
What's worse is we essentially lost 2 players Sayfarth for 10 and May for the rest of the game. They lost the guy Sayfarth hit who came back and were sweet.
 
Okie dokie so our Alex's have both been in trouble with the judiciary.

Seyfarth because its his 3rd charge and whatever he gets a 3 match suspension for dangerous head high contact to a player who is falling down slowly.

Twal for some random tripping offence I missed

AND GUESS WHAT

Crichton gets absolutely nothing. Not a fine, nothing.

Also worth noting Crichton gave May a Cat 1 concussion, but I'm pretty sure (could be wrong) Seyfarth did not to whoever he hit.

Nothing to see here........
 
TopTiger said:
View attachment 26318
Click to expand...
They should fight the charge and try and lose.

Wins all round; Seyfarth removes all prior loading and we don't have to see him on the field for the rest of the year!

In the fair dinkum stakes, to have him cop that charge and Crichton zero is just the NRL protecting their own call.

Slipping or not, Crichton engaged in moderate to high force contact as he crouched and launched into May aggressively, which would've been a great shot... if May didn't slip. But we've been told all along that the onus is on the defending player, considering the conditions, maybe he should've shown more care for what could happen with a tackle like that.

Seyfarth's force was less, despite having no excuses and getting him flush, but with less impact.

Sua'ali'i on Walsh in Origin last year showed that slipping means zero.

So it seems hard to argue that Crichton hasn't been lucky, particularly in direct comparison to Seyfarth's charge, both on and off field.

If it is just the case that the officials have since adjusted to allow for more leniency in the case of a falling player, and this is a permanent and consistent change to how they're judged moving forward, then I can live with that.
 
weststigerman said:
He kicked the winning goal in golden point vs Sharks, kicked the winning field goal against Titans and was best on ground yesterday.

He's been our best player for the last 6 weeks and I think some are blinded by their hate.

He deserves to get the best deal he can. Just like Luai did.
Click to expand...
Only real prob with AD and I love the guy he's all heart, he just hasn't been able to string a season of consistent football togeather yet. He's had horrendous injuries he's fought back from. He's in a purple patch of form atm, my concern and alot of others concern is he signs the new deal and his form drops off a cliff. He just struggles to find a long patch of real consistent football.
 
Kelce68 said:
They should fight the charge and try and lose.

Wins all round; Seyfarth removes all prior loading and we don't have to see him on the field for the rest of the year!

In the fair dinkum stakes, to have him cop that charge and Crichton zero is just the NRL protecting their own call.

Slipping or not, Crichton engaged in moderate to high force contact as he crouched and launched into May aggressively, which would've been a great shot... if May didn't slip. But we've been told all along that the onus is on the defending player, considering the conditions, maybe he should've shown more care for what could happen with a tackle like that.

Seyfarth's force was less, despite having no excuses and getting him flush, but with less impact.

Sua'ali'i on Walsh in Origin last year showed that slipping means zero.

So it seems hard to argue that Crichton hasn't been lucky, particularly in direct comparison to Seyfarth's charge, both on and off field.

If it is just the case that the officials have since adjusted to allow for more leniency in the case of a falling player, and this is a permanent and consistent change to how they're judged moving forward, then I can live with that.
Click to expand...
N.R.L is a clown comp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 457 (members: 42, guests: 415)
Back
Top