Whether he dived or not, good on him, he is copping crap for winning the game for his team, Sandow took a dive during the game when we were gaining momentum off a Parra error, he tried to get time off but the Reff didn't call it. Good work by Brooks, win a game dirty or not as long as you win.
Luke Brooks Dive
- Thread starter Milky
- Start date
- Status
I would hate to see the game go like soccer. I cant stand a minute of watching those punces dive. If he dived, he is helping to ruin the game. It looked ball line to me and thats good enough to let dogs lie. IfI see a blatant acting move, then I dont care who it is, ill dog them.
Cosimo_Zaretti
New member
I'm not sold on Brooks taking a dive, but it doesn't matter. He was collected by a decoy runner and the refs made the call. Just because it's not always called doesn't mean you should have a sook when one goes against you. Parra kept rolling the dice, throwing cutout passes with a lot of bodies in motion coming through the line. When you do that, you risk obstruction calls, you risk silly knock ons and you risk runaway intercept tries. The eels managed to come up with all three.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
Who cares, Parra can't complain about it costing them the game either cos they leveled the game up anyway and still gave themselves the chance to pull it out.
Really? A front rower runs at one of the smallest players on the field, who just happens to be moving backwards, catches him with a shoulder/slightly outstretched arm and surprise, surprise, the smaller guy falls over! The only people saying this have clearly not watched Brooks this season - he's tough and not in the Ennis sense.
Point the finger at Gower. Even if Brooks had dived, it was Gower making the contact that allowed him to.
Point the finger at Gower. Even if Brooks had dived, it was Gower making the contact that allowed him to.
Tigerdave
Well-known member
Looked more like Brooks tripped over Gower's leg, in any event, Gower was in the wrong and the correct call was made.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
It was one of those decisions that your opinion would be based on which side of the fence you sit. Was 50/50 imo.
Juro
Well-known member
@krayola said:
Yeah, that's pretty much how I see it. Anyway, the penalty was not for knocking him over, it was for obstruction.
S
system
Guest
@Tigerdave said:
Agree with this. It was the contact with the leg that felled Brooks
That said Hybrid is right it probably depends which side you are on
simonthetiger
New member
Looked to me like he tripped him too…...def 50/50 call that could have gone either way...i was shocked when they no try-ed it.
Gary_Bakerloo
New member
I hope he did take a dive. I still remember Luke Burt staying down in 2009 to get an 8 point try.
tig_prmz
Well-known member
thought that was a dive.. brooks would be my enemy no.1 if i was a parra supporter atm. cant believe they ruled obstruction on that.
foreveratiger
New member
Don't cry over spilt milk, they had there chance and bombed, that decoy runner changed his line of run just slightly and was watching Brooks while running, the ref's got it right and not being one eyed either.
They should blame Sandow not brooks
They should blame Sandow not brooks
innsaneink
Well-known member
Correct desicion
end of /-
end of /-
If Brooks was capable of weighing up, in the miniscule amount of time available to him, that he was no chance of making a tackle but that there was a runner in the vicinity that he could take a convenient dive off then he's even better than we think. Watching the replay several times I still thought he was a chance of getting involved in that play, in which case he'd have to be some kind of a magician to figure out exactly how it was going to play out and decide that a dive was a better option. Not to mention the fact that we've already seen enough of the kid's defensive heart to know he's not one to back out of a tackle if he thinks he can get to it.
balmain boy
Well-known member
How can it be a dive when a 110kg forward runs into him and he wasn't braced for a collision? If Gower wasn't there, Brooks stays on his feet, defensive line keeps its shape and have a better chance to stop the try. Would we have stopped it? Maybe, maybe not, but we didn't get the chance to try so it's a correct penalty.
tig_prmz
Well-known member
in all honest, it happens very quick- brooks was quite indecisive whether to go for the man on his inside or his outside and was half half. i have no doubt that he exaggerated the collision a little bit more than what it was and since he was half half he was quite unbalanced as well. it was all round messy- still not worth the no try decision esp since on field ref said it's a try.
What a sore loser? Parra had plenty of opportunity to win the game, without our captain and hooker and our full back. Instead of saying they had a lot to improve next time, all they had were excuses. With our full team the next time we will win and show them how the game is to be really played.
- Status
