LIVE GAME Round 24 v Manly

[Tiger_Fanatic3]

 

[WhiTe Tiger]

View attachment 26763

What it's all about!

Great pic!

Although I had to zoom in, I thought she was holding a spoon there for a minute...

 

[dazza65]

Hate to kick a guy for no reason, he didn’t do the dirty on us like many others but it reinforces my long held view …..
“Alexander also savaged Manly five-eighth Luke Brooks, saying: “Luke Brooks may as well not play, I’m serious, because he offers nothing.”

 

[jirskyr]

Yeah terrible call.
They have said intentional passes from dh into.a.player will be penalised...however that has always been in the field of.play....i havent seen one before of a defending team on their own line.
The ref said Api had other options...however th offside manly bloke limits apis options and made it easier for manlys defense...they knew he could only pass left or go himself...all the advantage was with manly there.
Its a blatant deliberate tactic nowadays players lazy lying in the ruck impeding d/h's

Hard agree. There are circumstances where it is reasonable to expect a DH NOT to intentionally pass into an opponent, where he could step back or further across and where the opponent has completed a tackle and effectively rolled out of the ruck.

In our instance however Turbo hasn't cleared the ruck and he hasn't affected a tackle - he as instead held his spot offside in our defensive line. Because he was attacking a kick. He didn't have to be there, it wasn't a defensive play. Turbo should be clearing out backwards not just kneeling there on the line.

And Api doesn't have a choice, he can't pass left because nobody is back on side and he can't step back because the advancing defence forces him in-goal. He cannot afford a looping pass because it costs too much time.

At worst they should have given the ball back to Tigers, forced Turbo to remove himself, then restart the play. That's bad enough, it puts the Tigers runner under enormous pressure, but at least it clears the dummy half to get a pass away.

The rule was brought in because DHs were throwing intentionally stupid and blatant passes into defenders who had exited the ruck after a tackle. Passes that were never on, never going anywhere, not part of natural play. Api's pass was a completely legitimate option at that field position, it wasn't some silly throw-away and that should be taken into account.

 

[rusted-on]

4 from 10 indicates their decline in recent years.

Saying 14 from 20 includes a period that distorts the most recent decade. The difference is significant.

So using your own logic this time, you have to acknowledge that your comparison of my noting the last 20 year record of the sea eagles to the premiership run the Dragons went on 60-70 years ago was irrelevant.

 

[Oldman]

You have totally missed my point

Yep
Sorry Weststigers
Next time I’ll read all posts before jumping in.

 

[weststigers]

Yep
Sorry Weststigers
Next time I’ll read all posts before jumping in.

No worries big fella

 

[weststigers]

So using your own logic this time, you have to acknowledge that your comparison of my noting the last 20 year record of the sea eagles to the premiership run the Dragons went on 60-70 years ago was irrelevant.

Yes exactly. I used thar example to show how ridiculous your example was. 🙄