State of Origin 2025

Tucker said:
Yeah that side of the field is where the points are on offer.
Latrell is a slug in defence and To’o is giving up 6 inches in height with even more in leaping ability.
Stupid penalties has hurt the Maroons.
Click to expand...
Yeah Latrells reads in defense are terrible.
QLD need to throw more sweeping plays at that side if they are any chance,
 
gregjm87 said:
l
Correct decision but a ridiculous rule.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is the correct decision. The circumstances of the contact needs to be taken into account to determine the severity of the indiscretion. Coates instigating forceful contact well before the ball came results in an outcome that is difficult to avoid for the defender. Sort of like when a player slips and is taken high. The attacker causes it.
 
4jtigers said:
Have you heard the commentators? Momentum shift lol... they are almost willing it to happen 😂
Click to expand...
A bunch of talking heads who overplay it by trying to prove how smart they are imo.
Blues absolutely dominant but the door slightly ajar, I hope we’re not saying a game of two halves at full time.
Every stat in Blues favour, except goal kicks, another 6 or 8 points would have been a more accurate reflection of the game.
 
QLD didn’t even get a chance to play any footy in the first half, we might see something now with a man down
 
king_sirro said:
I don't think it is the correct decision. The circumstances of the contact needs to be taken into account to determine the severity of the indiscretion. Coates instigating forceful contact well before the ball came results in an outcome that is difficult to avoid for the defender. Sort of like when a player slips and is taken high. The attacker causes it.
Click to expand...
If Too keeps his arms down rather than wrapping them around Coates he avoids the penalty regardless of Coates initiating contact (by competing for the ball). Too could have easily avoided the penalty.
However it would also mean giving Coates free play at the ball and increase his scoring potential. Any rule where just letting the bloke score is essentially the only option given to the defender is the only legal option is a stupid rule. The rule was intended to stop players in the air having their legs taken out causing them to come down head first. The rule should be no contact below the waist on a player in the air. Avoids the flipping motion but allows the defender to try to defend. It was argued by a couple during the rules committee but consider to 'grey' when the committee at the time was obsessed with trying to make rulings black and white.
In your example of a high tackles, it is still a penalty regardless of the circumstances leading to the high contact. Just as that was correctly a penalty.
 
gregjm87 said:
If Too keeps his arms down rather than wrapping them around Coates he avoids the penalty regardless of Coates initiating contact (by competing for the ball). Too could have easily avoided the penalty.
However it would also mean giving Coates free play at the ball and increase his scoring potential. Any rule where just letting the bloke score is essentially the only option given to the defender is the only legal option is a stupid rule. The rule was intended to stop players in the air having their legs taken out causing them to come down head first. The rule should be no contact below the waist on a player in the air. Avoids the flipping motion but allows the defender to try to defend. It was argued by a couple during the rules committee but consider to 'grey' when the committee at the time was obsessed with trying to make rulings black and white.
In your example of a high tackles, it is still a penalty regardless of the circumstances leading to the high contact. Just as that was correctly a penalty.
Click to expand...

Too's arms were extended as the ball came. He can't compete for it with arms by his side
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 1,689 (members: 28, guests: 1,661)
Back
Top