2019 NRL Grand Finals *Spoilers

[Madge]

Graham boofhead just gave his press conference.

https://www.nrl.com/tv/matches/telstra-premiership/2019/grand-final/press-conference-roosters-v-raiders---grand-final-2019/

Starts at 1:28:25

 

[ElleryHanley]

You just can't have a situation where one ref can wave six again and dramatically impact the play...and one says no. There were80 000 people screaming, so all the players would have known was the CLEAR six again signal.

Annesley is delusional rattling on about the sec ref ovveruled and they called it out four times. No waya player can be expected to see one signal and then try to listen out for a contradictory call with 80 000 people yelling.

 

[cktiger]

You just can't have a situation where one ref can wave six again and dramatically impact the play...and one says no. There were80 000 people screaming, so all the players would have known was the CLEAR six again signal.

Annesley is delusional rattling on about the sec ref ovveruled and they called it out four times. No waya player can be expected to see one signal and then try to listen out for a contradictory call with 80 000 people yelling.

It wasn’t six again . In the end the right call.
Cronk getting 10 was the wrong call.

 

[JD Tiger]

@cktiger No way. It was very close, but Cronk definitely got him early, which probably impacted him dropping the ball, and definitely constitutes a professional foul. Penalty try was not warranted even though he was three metres out, but had to be a sin bin.

 

[bigsiro]

Ah, the perpetually offended boofheads. Got to love them.

I’m no fan of the roosters, but they were very good tonight. Good tough game which the best team won.

Move on.

Disagree. The best team lost.

 

[tigerbill]

#SixAgain

 

[tigerbill]

You just can't have a situation where one ref can wave six again and dramatically impact the play...and one says no. There were80 000 people screaming, so all the players would have known was the CLEAR six again signal.

Annesley is delusional rattling on about the sec ref ovveruled and they called it out four times. No waya player can be expected to see one signal and then try to listen out for a contradictory call with 80 000 people yelling.


It wasn’t six again . In the end the right call.
Cronk getting 10 was the wrong call.

I'll spell it out for you as clearly as possible.
Whether it was the right call or not doesn't matter; it's the changing of the decision at a crucial time. If they had known it was the last, they would have played differently. It's not hard to understand mate.

 

[Demps]

@hobbo1 hard to even identify one tbh
Latrell sucks.

Maybe Morris?

 

[Demps]

Respect to Canberra tho.
Thanks for knocking those cheating scum dogs Melbourne out of the finals.

 

[fibrodreaming]

Good tough game which the best team won.

It was a good tough game, but I'm not sure Easts deserved to win. They enjoyed two outrageous pieces of good fortune that led to their two tries.

If the charge down had not been interfered with, and the six to go reversed, then who knows what the ultimate outcome would have been.

The Chooks were very lucky, or, conversely, the Raiders were very unlucky and the second piece of bad luck was a blunder by the officials, which detracts from outcome and reflects badly on the NRL. It certainly doesn't dispel the distinct impression that Easts are unfairly favoured.

 

[Dyloh]

It wasn't actually 6 again was it? If Raiders go on to score there after the Ref calls 6 again and win does everyone have a meltdown for Roosters ya reckon?

 

[mike]

It wasn't actually 6 again was it? If Raiders go on to score there after the Ref calls 6 again and win does everyone have a meltdown for Roosters ya reckon?

Right or wrong it was the change of decision that effected the Raiders. Once they had ruled six again there is no way the players would even look at or hear the ref to see if he had changed his mind. If it was the last tackle they would have played it differently. You just can’t change such crucial decisions mid play and expect the players to see that, and respond. It was farcical and a really bad look for the game. The Raiders were denied a chance to continue to press the Roosters. If it was the last tackle, the six again call denied the Raiders their chance to run the last tackle play. Either way you look at it, it was a dud call for the Raiders.

 

[Dyloh]

@mike not denying that my brother, just can't help thinking that if it was the other side of the coin there might not be such a drama.

 

[gallagher]

@mike not denying that my brother, just can't help thinking that if it was the other side of the coin there might not be such a drama.

There'd be no drama. The ref shouted last tackle 5 times and was within 10m of Wighton.

 

[NT_Tiger]

Next season the NRL should start the season with the Grand Final celebrations, awarding the trophy to the Roosters. Get it over with early and save everybody a lot of angst. The Roosters should then take their well deserved holiday while the rest of the 15 teams vie for second place.

 

[4jtigers]

Controversial moment as trainer deflection stops potential Raiders try
By Ben Glover

One of the most bizarre moments in Grand Final history has cruelly denied the Raiders what might have been the first try of the game after the Sydney Roosters' trainer unwittingly intervened.

Just over three minutes into the first half of the decider a Sia Soliola charge down deflected the ball behind the Roosters line of attack and with Raiders back-rower Elliott Whitehead favoured to get to the ball first with no defenders in front of him play was cruelly halted.

Soliola's falcon was so powerful that it deflected into the face of the Roosters' trainer, who was about 10 metres away. That forced the referee to stop play and in a cruel twist, the Roosters got to feed a scrum and get a new set of six due to a rule that favours the 'attacking' side in such circumstances. While it was likely possession would have gone to the Raiders if not for the deflection off the trainer, the Roosters were still considered the attacking side as they were the last side to have secure possession.

Naturally, it was a rule that had fans fuming and the significance of the momentum shift wasn't lost on Nine commentators Phil Gould and Andrew Johns. "How is it fair that when a side's trainer accidentally interferes with play, that same side gets to feed a scrum? Absolutely outrageous. Gould: "Well this is amazing. This could have been a huge advantage to the Raiders."What an absurd law. If your trainer interferes with the play, your side should be penalised".

no idea why this was an issue... should've been a penalty to the Rorters... you should see how Keary ended up in the air when he got tackled after the kick... not a Rorters fan, I'm just saying the other side of the equation

 

[TheDaBoss]

Anyone clean up the commentators room? They made a huge mess during thr game......

:::

Spoiler Text

:::

 

[gallagher]

Anyone clean up the commentators room? They made a huge mess during thr game......

:::

Spoiler Text

:::

It's bloody horrible isn't it? I don't know how people watch ch 9 all year.

 

[rustycage]

You just can't have a situation where one ref can wave six again and dramatically impact the play...and one says no. There were80 000 people screaming, so all the players would have known was the CLEAR six again signal.

Annesley is delusional rattling on about the sec ref ovveruled and they called it out four times. No waya player can be expected to see one signal and then try to listen out for a contradictory call with 80 000 people yelling.


It wasn’t six again . In the end the right call.
Cronk getting 10 was the wrong call.

No it wasn't. Multpliple players including Luke Garner were binned and then suspended for split second decisions that favoured the attacking team. That decision was consistant with plenty of others this year.

 

[Tim Sheens]

@Newtown the rule is actually the team in the attacking half of the field. If the ball hit the trainer on the Canberra attacking side of half way they would have got the ball. It was bad luck but the right call. The rule probably should be reconsidered as it is mainly written for if the ball hits the ref.

Wasn't he on that side of the halfway line when hit, as I thought so and expected a Raiders feed on that basis?