What about the penalty count???

[Magpie_Magic]

18 penalties.

The most penalties by a team to win an NRL game.

Ever.

True?
Is usually us with unwanted records.

Good stuff eh

During the mid 80s Wests when they were trying to make us look bad to boot us out conceded similar 3 or 4 times with 1 win.
It shows the magnatitude and the the level the NRL was willing to do it for Slater.

Remember 2 years ago at Leichhardt we had a legitimate penalty try not awarded and lost by a point and then th e game I saw in Melbourne front threw a pass so far forward for a try it got behind Lawrence in the defensive line.

 

[Guest]

Cut the swearing out please guys.

 

[happy_tiger]

18 penalties.

The most penalties by a team to win an NRL game.

Ever.

True?
Is usually us with unwanted records.

Good stuff eh

I can vividly remember the Kangaroos winning a game in 86 in France playing against either 23-2 or 25-2 penalty count

Furner said at the time if the provincial side had of scored first they would never had won , that's how bad it was

 

[cktiger]

[No message]

 

[TIGER]

What about when Munster tripped/back slammed on of our players. I thought that would come under a dangerous tackle or a least not in the spirit of the game

Perfectly legal tackle, it may look bad but there's nothing illegal about it, if there was Alfie Langer would have had to find another sport to play.

 

[Masterton]

If Storm were penalised 18 times, it would be back page news.

 

[upthetigers]

What about when Munster tripped/back slammed on of our players. I thought that would come under a dangerous tackle or a least not in the spirit of the game

Perfectly legal tackle, it may look bad but there's nothing illegal about it, if there was Alfie Langer would have had to find another sport to play.

If tripping is illegal why isn't that play? If it's legal it surprises me that more players don't do it to get players to the ground.

 

[jirskyr]

What about when Munster tripped/back slammed on of our players. I thought that would come under a dangerous tackle or a least not in the spirit of the game

Perfectly legal tackle, it may look bad but there's nothing illegal about it, if there was Alfie Langer would have had to find another sport to play.

It was the post-held component that most people were complaining about. No issue if he does it immediately after contact, but having two players hold him upright to the count of "held", then throw him with double body weight = unnecessary.

They called held because he was stopped with a lifted leg, therefore vulnerable. If a 3rd man had come in in that situation they would have penalised.

It was dangerous and deserved a penalty, even though it wasnt malicious.

 

[jirskyr]

What about when Munster tripped/back slammed on of our players. I thought that would come under a dangerous tackle or a least not in the spirit of the game

Perfectly legal tackle, it may look bad but there's nothing illegal about it, if there was Alfie Langer would have had to find another sport to play.

If tripping is illegal why isn't that play? If it's legal it surprises me that more players don't do it to get players to the ground.

Because tripping is on a running player and that makes it way less dangerous.

It's fairly rare for players to use throws like that, but I dont disagree if it was common you might havw cause to trt and eliminate it.

 

[sideline_eye]

What about when Munster tripped/back slammed on of our players. I thought that would come under a dangerous tackle or a least not in the spirit of the game

I haven't read all of this thread so this may have already been answered but as far as I know, it isn't a trip if you have your hands on the player being tackled. However, I fully agree that the back slam of Kev was dangerous and uncalled for. I've seen many less dangerous things penalised and this was over the top; plus I really think it would have been a penalty if we had done it.

 

[happy_tiger]

What about when Munster tripped/back slammed on of our players. I thought that would come under a dangerous tackle or a least not in the spirit of the game

I haven't read all of this thread so this may have already been answered but as far as I know, it isn't a trip if you have your hands on the player being tackled. However, I fully agree that the back slam of Kev was dangerous and uncalled for. I've seen many less dangerous things penalised and this was over the top; plus I really think it would have been a penalty if we had done it.

Basically it is an altered version of Ray Price's Cumberland Throw …....

The rule states that as long as your hands come in contact with the player first and remain on the attacker the whole time you can use the hip/leg to finish the tackle

We did Judo for two years on the direction of the Jets trainer back in the mid 80's (my PE teacher at the time ) , it is a modified version of a hip toss and counteracts the weight difference and strength issues of bigger guys against smaller guys Your basically using the attackers momentum to tackle himself (if that makes sense 😕 )

I've already taught my young fella how to do it against real big blokes , he can do it off either hip/leg now , the big problem is if you don't keep grip with your arms /hands , it looks pretty ugly then

The other advantage is the attacker is now also on his back and the defender has full control of how quick he gets up , many times if you watch the referees they actually will call that a dominant tackle

 

[Yossarian]

Okay I'm watching the replay and going through the 9-1 penalty count.

#1 35:24 to go. Penalty Storm for crowding player so he plays it sideways. Reality check: Storm player tries to play the ball too quickly.

#2 24:50 to go Penalty WT for offside on try line

#3 17:03 Penalty Storm high tackle from Packer. Slips off but fair enough

#4 16:55 Penalty Storm Mat offside from tap. Maybe brushes Smith who goes down Italian soccer/football style. He was offside but it was pretty soft.

[On video ref chat Ref says it will be a penalty if there's no try]

#5 14:02 Penalty Storm for lifting. Tackle almost completed feet lifted up but hardly dangerous

#6 13:05 Penalty Storm for Marshall hand on ball on Smith

#7 10:05 Penalty Storm for working in the tackle? I couldn't understand the officials. Yeah he swung him around but really? It's just as doing that? The most infamous wrestling team in the comp didn't get a single penalty against them?

So the highlights missed 3 of them if anyone has details I'll add them.

 

[NT_Tiger]

The refs will have nothing to answer for.

If you put the magnifying glass on each Storm penalty they will pass the pub test. However, what doesn’t get scrutinised are the penalties NOT given, as in why the Tigers only got one penalty in the second half.

My thoughts too.

 

[Yossarian]

Another thing that comes over clear watching the replay is how a prick (is that ok?) Munster comes across as.

 

[NT_Tiger]

Munster is definitely an automatically edited!

 

[Masterton]

What about when Munster tripped/back slammed on of our players. I thought that would come under a dangerous tackle or a least not in the spirit of the game

I haven't read all of this thread so this may have already been answered but as far as I know, it isn't a trip if you have your hands on the player being tackled. However, I fully agree that the back slam of Kev was dangerous and uncalled for. I've seen many less dangerous things penalised and this was over the top; plus I really think it would have been a penalty if we had done it.

I was just reading up on head slams in the judiciary guide.. Not sure if this was applicable:

“Head Slams” Charged as Dangerous Contact – Head/Neck
Tackles which involve a “head slam” and which are charged as Dangerous Contact –
Head/Neck will generally attract the following directions:
All players at all times have a duty to avoid the possibility of injury to the head,
neck and spinal column of an opposing player.
It is conduct in breach of the Rules where a defending player, with his hand or arm
across the head or neck of the ball carrier, unnecessarily and unfairly causes the
head of the ball carrier to make forceful contact with the ground.
A player may be guilty of this offence when his conduct is careless, reckless or
intentional.

 

[Tigerdon]

Munster should of gone for 10 in the bin of that.

 

[Tim Sheens]

What about when Munster tripped/back slammed on of our players. I thought that would come under a dangerous tackle or a least not in the spirit of the game

I haven't read all of this thread so this may have already been answered but as far as I know, it isn't a trip if you have your hands on the player being tackled. However, I fully agree that the back slam of Kev was dangerous and uncalled for. I've seen many less dangerous things penalised and this was over the top; plus I really think it would have been a penalty if we had done it.

I was just reading up on head slams in the judiciary guide.. Not sure if this was applicable:

“Head Slams” Charged as Dangerous Contact – Head/Neck
Tackles which involve a “head slam” and which are charged as Dangerous Contact –
Head/Neck will generally attract the following directions:
All players at all times have a duty to avoid the possibility of injury to the head,
neck and spinal column of an opposing player.
It is conduct in breach of the Rules where a defending player, with his hand or arm
across the head or neck of the ball carrier, unnecessarily and unfairly causes the
head of the ball carrier to make forceful contact with the ground.
A player may be guilty of this offence when his conduct is careless, reckless or
intentional.

Would only be applicable if Cammy was not involved in the tackle.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Let’s not forget the dozen looks they had at Brooks try, looking for a reason not to give it.

On that what were they acually looking for..you don't get bunker audio at mthe game and we couldn't work it out with all the rocking and rollling

Was it some sort of obstrution lost ball what…?

They had about six thousand views of him taking the pass. They must have been thinking (or hoping) he lost it into the defender.

They were looking at every reason not to give that. I nearly fell off my chair when they said Lawrence was OK for running at Slater.

 

[Tacky]

Funny how the Storm would spend an eternity wrestling and slowing down the ruck but, when the Tigers started doing it they either get penalised or booed by the crowd. That being said tho, there were points where the penalties were justified or we were giving them away intentionally.