Penalty tries and tripping

[innsaneink]

If you're gonna be a coward and submit/voluntary tackle… You deserve to get smashed.

Dog shit? Get a clue

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

Yep, if a player is going to lay down, they deserve all they get. They can consider themselves lucky that the referees don't enforce half the rules these days. It should be that they get penalised, AND get smashed

 

[Nelson]

Paul Carter…another trip gone unnoticed.

Also more sackless referees. Sam Burgess was warned, then did the ultimate dog shot (hitting a defenseless player on the ground), nothing. I HATE THE NRL.

Carters trip will be pulled up by the match review committee .

IMO burges's so called cheap shot was fair game as the officials won't penalise a player who surrenders in the tackle .
Even though the shot was a bit over the top .

Just because it isn't necessarily illegal doesn't mean it's not a jerk move or fairly called a cheap shot. The point of contact looked to me like it was around the kidneys. He could easily have messed him up badly doing that and for what? It's not tough, it's a completely cowardly move.

 

[hobbo]

Paul Carter…another trip gone unnoticed.

Also more sackless referees. Sam Burgess was warned, then did the ultimate dog shot (hitting a defenseless player on the ground), nothing. I HATE THE NRL.

Carters trip will be pulled up by the match review committee .

IMO burges's so called cheap shot was fair game as the officials won't penalise a player who surrenders in the tackle .
Even though the shot was a bit over the top .

Just because it isn't necessarily illegal doesn't mean it's not a jerk move or fairly called a cheap shot. The point of contact looked to me like it was around the kidneys. He could easily have messed him up badly doing that and for what? It's not tough, it's a completely cowardly move.

Nothing really wrong with what burges's did , as I said if you read my post correctly ?
I said it was slightly over the top ( the tackle ) but if the ref's started penalising players for voluntary tackles we wouldn't be having this discussion .
It's not OZ tag !

 

[Nelson]

Paul Carter…another trip gone unnoticed.

Also more sackless referees. Sam Burgess was warned, then did the ultimate dog shot (hitting a defenseless player on the ground), nothing. I HATE THE NRL.

Carters trip will be pulled up by the match review committee .

IMO burges's so called cheap shot was fair game as the officials won't penalise a player who surrenders in the tackle .
Even though the shot was a bit over the top .

Just because it isn't necessarily illegal doesn't mean it's not a jerk move or fairly called a cheap shot. The point of contact looked to me like it was around the kidneys. He could easily have messed him up badly doing that and for what? It's not tough, it's a completely cowardly move.

Nothing really wrong with what burges's did , as I said if you read my post correctly ?
I said it was slightly over the top ( the tackle ) but if the ref's started penalising players for voluntary tackles we wouldn't be having this discussion .
It's not OZ tag !

Yeah I read it but it was just the "so called cheap shot" part - it was a straight up cheap shot! If someone had done that to one of my teammates and I was nearby I would've done something about it.

I agree that the refs should either start policing voluntary tackles or the rule should just be changed. It's a joke at the moment.

 

[Harvey]

Blair shot on Reynolds was worse. If the bloke had got up to run then burgess could not have driven his shoulder into him. It was not like he hit him around the head with a swinging arm (ala Tapau), but then that is only worth a week these days

 

[jirskyr]

So Burgess apparently put on a cheap shot, but Adam Blair half cracks the ribs of two players being held upright in a tackle and that is fine. Oh and collects the jaw of Reynolds.

 

[hobbo]

So Burgess apparently put on a cheap shot, but Adam Blair half cracks the ribs of two players being held upright in a tackle and that is fine. Oh and collects the jaw of Reynolds.

Blairs a grub , I hope he's on the receiving end of a few 'cheap shots ' when we play the Donkeys in a couple of weeks .

 

[Doc_Tiger]

I saw nothing wrong with Burgess' action. It was aggressive - that's league. Blairs shot wasn't good. I think both the bunnies and broncos are pretty much protected by referees. They get away with anything and everything.

 

[jirskyr]

Burgess was careful not to use a swinging arm or elbow, he just cocked his bicep. He would have used the same motion on a regular tackle, not his fault the player was lying around rather than running at his face.

 

[innsaneink]

Looks like Adam may have broken Adams jaw again

 

[westTAHger]

Will be interested to see how long Adam Blair gets suspended.
Let's take the info that Adam Reynolds jaws is once again fractured/broken.

**Would the following be a massive deterrent to all players.**
Blair is on the sidelines for entire time it takes for Adam Reynolds is not playing, eg. 6 weeks **THEN** **ONCE** Reynolds resumes playing, Blair serves his suspension time, eg 5 weeks.

then Blair total time out would be 11 weeks.

 

[Russell]

Will be interested to see how long Adam Blair gets suspended.
Let's take the info that Adam Reynolds jaws is once again fractured/broken.

**Would the following be a massive deterrent to all players.**
Blair is on the sidelines for entire time it takes for Adam Reynolds is not playing, eg. 6 weeks **THEN** **ONCE** Reynolds resumes playing, Blair serves his suspension time, eg 5 weeks.

then Blair total time out would be 11 weeks.

Dream on Mate, might be the scenario in a Wests Tigers jumper - not where he is now.

 

[Nelson]

Burgess was careful not to use a swinging arm or elbow, he just cocked his bicep. He would have used the same motion on a regular tackle, not his fault the player was lying around rather than running at his face.

He dropped his right shoulder into him so his body weight was going through a point - his shoulder. Big hits are great to see and aggression is great to see but that's just a mugging. The hit wasn't going to dislodge the ball, he was just maliciously trying to hurt a bloke who, voluntarily or not, was in no position to defend himself from the hit. Imagine if it had been Tedesco on the bottom of that, you would have been incensed.

 

[innsaneink]

What's the difference to a defender trying to hurt an attacker in a conventional tackle?
Seems to be your only gripe. If the attacker doesn't want to be a sitting duck, he shouldn't put himself in the voluntary position he did… Get up.... try to avoid the defence.. make ground... see what's coming.

 

[Fade_To_Black]

Will be interested to see how long Adam Blair gets suspended.
Let's take the info that Adam Reynolds jaws is once again fractured/broken.

**Would the following be a massive deterrent to all players.**
Blair is on the sidelines for entire time it takes for Adam Reynolds is not playing, eg. 6 weeks **THEN** **ONCE** Reynolds resumes playing, Blair serves his suspension time, eg 5 weeks.

then Blair total time out would be 11 weeks.

Dream on Mate, might be the scenario in a Wests Tigers jumper - not where he is now.

So true. He would be guaranteed to spend months on the sideline if he was still playing for us. However, the way the NRL bow down to the Broncos' every whim Blair will probably cry to the judiciary that he is suffering deep remorse and mental anguish resulting in severe depression as a result of hurting Reynolds.
So he will get 1 week, with a fully funded trip to Hamilton Island to help him de-stress and a substantial payout from the RLPA for the distress and trauma he has suffered after belting someone high and late. Don't be surprised. That's how the NRL roll when it comes to their cash-cow clubs.

 

[Nelson]

What's the difference to a defender trying to hurt an attacker in a conventional tackle?
Seems to be your only gripe. If the attacker doesn't want to be a sitting duck, he shouldn't put himself in the voluntary position he did… Get up.... try to avoid the defence.. make ground... see what's coming.

He fell on a loose ball he didn't lie down on the ground with the ball. As for seeing what's coming, they stay down in that situation (i.e. loose ball in broken play) because they can't see what's coming. They could get hit from any direction. In getting up you put your knees in a bad position should anyone decide to come along and flop on you at that point. I can understand why they stay down and if they don't want that as part of the game then they should start applying the voluntary tackle rule, not declaring people fair game.

In a conventional tackle: the player can take (and usually is taking) action to defend themselves; and you're not compressing them between you and the ground where there is an increased risk of internal injuries. It's not like they're playing on sprung mats out there.

 

[westTAHger]

Will be interested to see how long Adam Blair gets suspended.
Let's take the info that Adam Reynolds jaws is once again fractured/broken.

**Would the following be a massive deterrent to all players.**
Blair is on the sidelines for entire time it takes for Adam Reynolds is not playing, eg. 6 weeks **THEN** **ONCE** Reynolds resumes playing, Blair serves his suspension time, eg 5 weeks.

then Blair total time out would be 11 weeks.

Dream on Mate, might be the scenario in a Wests Tigers jumper - not where he is now.

Aahh well, dreams are free. :laughing: I do really well in them :wink:

 

[westTAHger]

Will be interested to see how long Adam Blair gets suspended.
Let's take the info that Adam Reynolds jaws is once again fractured/broken.

**Would the following be a massive deterrent to all players.**
Blair is on the sidelines for entire time it takes for Adam Reynolds is not playing, eg. 6 weeks **THEN** **ONCE** Reynolds resumes playing, Blair serves his suspension time, eg 5 weeks.

then Blair total time out would be 11 weeks.

Dream on Mate, might be the scenario in a Wests Tigers jumper - not where he is now.

So true. He would be guaranteed to spend months on the sideline if he was still playing for us. However, the way the NRL bow down to the Broncos' every whim Blair will probably cry to the judiciary that he is suffering deep remorse and mental anguish resulting in severe depression as a result of hurting Reynolds.
So he will get 1 week, with a fully funded trip to Hamilton Island to help him de-stress and a substantial payout from the RLPA for the distress and trauma he has suffered after belting someone high and late. Don't be surprised. That's how the NRL roll when it comes to their cash-cow clubs.

Once again, it will show the **shocking bias, and preferential treatment that goes the way for the broncos**. Smells very much like, manly in the 70's & 80"s, and roosters all the time :unamused: :blush:

 

[innsaneink]

What's the difference to a defender trying to hurt an attacker in a conventional tackle?
Seems to be your only gripe. If the attacker doesn't want to be a sitting duck, he shouldn't put himself in the voluntary position he did… Get up.... try to avoid the defence.. make ground... see what's coming.

He fell on a loose ball he didn't lie down on the ground with the ball. As for seeing what's coming, they stay down in that situation (i.e. loose ball in broken play) because they can't see what's coming. They could get hit from any direction. In getting up you put your knees in a bad position should anyone decide to come along and flop on you at that point. I can understand why they stay down and if they don't want that as part of the game then they should start applying the voluntary tackle rule, not declaring people fair game.

In a conventional tackle: the player can take (and usually is taking) action to defend themselves; and you're not compressing them between you and the ground where there is an increased risk of internal injuries. It's not like they're playing on sprung mats out there.

I could pick this to peices, but I'll just say I disagree with you 100%…and leave it at that