Sick of Teddy being targeted

[Winnipeg]

Napa swings an arm the first time Tedesco touches the ball and he spends a good part of the first half off the field.

Several teams have taken the tactic this year of trying to rub him out - maybe its our fault that we rely on him so much that it becomes feasible to smash him and blunt our attack so much.

Napa better miss a week or two, his effort was much worse than JWH on Felise - then again it won't be any benefit to us.

 

[tiger05premier]

That's right napa deliberately through the arm out as he was not close enough to make the tackle and only concedes a penalty

 

[Fordy20]

If you're an opposition team why wouldn't you do it? Attack Tedesco's head on a kick return and Teddy goes off the field for a mandatory 15 minute concussion test. You give away a penalty and go on report, but the penalty is just a kick for touch early in the tackle count when the Tigers are deep in their own half. You trust your fresh pack to hold out the Tigers for one set who are now without their star player and who have had to reshuffle their entire backline, ruining attacking plays they may have.

It'd be your go to tactic every match.

 

[Winnipeg]

So is there anything that can be done about it? Has anyone ever heard a commentator mention that there seems to be a pattern?

i'm not wrong am I, memory is fuzzy but there must be at least 5-6 games over the past 2 seasons where someone seems to have targeted him with a high shot

 

[southerntiger]

Yep Teddy cops a lot of cheap stuff every week and teams seem to get away with it all the time. Ignoring the Napa hit, JWN smashed him with a forearm when he was on the ground in the second half.

Also I don't understand the Roosters weren't penalised for the shoulder charge off the ball on Lawrence in the second half. Crucial play. Roosters go on to score on the next set. It was a clear shoulder charge and was a reportable offence.

 

[tiger05premier]

If you're an opposition team why wouldn't you do it? Attack Tedesco's head on a kick return and Teddy goes off the field for a mandatory 15 minute concussion test. You give away a penalty and go on report, but the penalty is just a kick for touch early in the tackle count when the Tigers are deep in their own half. You trust your fresh pack to hold out the Tigers for one set who are now without their star player and who have had to reshuffle their entire backline, ruining attacking plays they may have.
It'd be your go to tactic every match
That's why we need tougher rules. Instead of the old send off and a team down to 12 player's just replace the offending player with a bench player and the offending player has no further part on the game leaving them a player short on the bench

 

[mctiger]

Yep Teddy cops a lot of cheap stuff every week and teams seem to get away with it all the time. Ignoring the Napa hit, JWN smashed him with a forearm when he was on the ground in the second half.

Also I don't understand the Roosters weren't penalised for the shoulder charge off the ball on Lawrence in the second half. Crucial play. Roosters go on to score on the next set. It was a clear shoulder charge and was a reportable offence.

Are you talking about when he was winded after he passed it? If so that wasn't a shoulder charge or even late for that matter. I do agree about the JWH play though.

 

[sheer64]

Head hits are becoming more common since the referees are taking advice from the bunker as to whether it is a reportable offence. Seems to me the main issue of concussion is not being considered in the onfield and bunker decisions. It is a contact sport so there has to be a common sense approach but the last few weeks there seems to be an abundence of high shots which only result in a penalty even though players may have been concussed as a result.

 

[southerntiger]

Yep Teddy cops a lot of cheap stuff every week and teams seem to get away with it all the time. Ignoring the Napa hit, JWN smashed him with a forearm when he was on the ground in the second half.

Also I don't understand the Roosters weren't penalised for the shoulder charge off the ball on Lawrence in the second half. Crucial play. Roosters go on to score on the next set. It was a clear shoulder charge and was a reportable offence.

Are you talking about when he was winded after he passed it? If so that wasn't a shoulder charge or even late for that matter. I do agree about the JWH play though.

Definite shoulder charge. Turned and aimed with the shoulder.

 

[cunno]

Part of the problem is opposition teams aren't worried about any retaliation from our forwards. Say for example One of the Roosters ,star, players copped what Teddy copped then our player responsible would have been watching his back knowing that at some stage JWH would square up. We don't have that level of mongrel in our forwards to make the opposition think twice about dirt, so unless the officials look after him, as they should, he is a target.

 

[Geo]

It was the knees of Mitchell after Teddy put Simona over for his TRY that sent Teddy to the head bin…

None the less something needs to be done across the NRL as a whole..We had 3 players today end up in there....Ted Simona and Taylor..

It's to easy for teams to target key players and just incur a penalty and on report...

 

[tigerap]

If I were Taylor I would insist the next time the opposition hit Teddy around the head like all teams do I would insist my player beat the crap out of the player who did it… Make a statement to the league they will not tolerate it

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

It was the knees of Mitchell after Teddy put Simona over for his TRY that sent Teddy to the head bin…

None the less something needs to be done across the NRL as a whole..We had 3 players today end up in there....Ted Simona and Taylor..

It's to easy for teams to target key players and just incur a penalty and on report...

What ever happened to the big crackdown on contact with the head being on report. I've seen some lately that Les Boyd would have been proud of . Anb no report.
In one of our recent games there were two rippers , one to one of our blokes , and one that we threw.
We bring in
concussion tests , but are letting players get away with causing the concussion in the first place. Head high tackles will never drop off until the send off rule starts to be used again( and that goes for tripping as well . Always considered a dog act

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

If you're an opposition team why wouldn't you do it? Attack Tedesco's head on a kick return and Teddy goes off the field for a mandatory 15 minute concussion test. You give away a penalty and go on report, but the penalty is just a kick for touch early in the tackle count when the Tigers are deep in their own half. You trust your fresh pack to hold out the Tigers for one set who are now without their star player and who have had to reshuffle their entire backline, ruining attacking plays they may have.
It'd be your go to tactic every match
That's why we need tougher rules. Instead of the old send off and a team down to 12 player's just replace the offending player with a bench player and the offending player has no further part on the game leaving them a player short on the bench

Bugger the crowds not liking to see a team a player down. Head highs on tv are seen by a lot of parents as why to not let their kids play league. It was cleaned up years ago , now is coming back. I couldn't care less about anything except stopping it.
Without sending an offender off, the team is not penalised until the next week. And it's their opposition next week who have the advantage of playing them without the player whose suspended
As for letting a team replace the offender. That is the easiest thing to get around , and I gaurantee Coaches will do it
A team has let's say Cameron Smith ( mainly because I don't mind seeing him smashed)
Ias their star player.
My team is playing them in a grand final
I have a bruiser in the lower grade, pick him , and he goes out and stiff arms Smith the first time he has the ball. My reserve grader gets sent off and one of my regular players goes on and replaces him and Smith takes no further part in the Grand
final.
Completely worth it to get rid of a star player for most of a game.
Think it won't happen, ????