NRL General Discussion Thread

[Midean]

Mam was dopped last year at the end of the season, Walsh played Cup in 21 after joining the Warriors.

It happens all the time.

A young half going back to Cup isn't new. He was back at magic round last week and didn't play Cup so he's getting closer to a recall.

McLennan questioning the Roosters maybe releasing Sua'ali'i. early isn't treating Sua'ali'i. badly. Rugby are just being annoying.

Still, it's fairly cut-throat, and I don't see any other young halves being dropped like this, also it seems very convenient to do this to Sua'ali'i in light of everything happening around him. A perfect scapegoat if you will.
Are you a Roosters supporter? Honest question.

 

[1910]

Still, it's fairly cut-throat, and I don't see any other young halves being dropped like this, also it seems very convenient to do this to Sua'ali'i in light of everything happening around him. A perfect scapegoat if you will.
Are you a Roosters supporter? Honest question.

No couldn't care less about the Roosters but facts are facts- Walker isn't doing anything that Thurston didn't do in 2002- played some NRL and went back to Cup. Thurston played in the Cup GF in 2002 for the Dogs. I don't buy this hard luck story at all.

Roosters can't control what Rugby say- If they are trying to put pressure on the Roosters to get him early that's up to them. But I don't see how it's treating him poorly.

In summary I don't really see how either are being treated poorly.

 

[Midean]

No couldn't care less about the Roosters but facts are facts- Walker isn't doing anything that Thurston didn't do in 2002- played some NRL and went back to Cup. Thurston played in the Cup GF in 2002 for the Dogs. I don't buy this hard luck story at all.

Roosters can't control what Rugby say- If they are trying to put pressure on the Roosters to get him early that's up to them. But I don't see how it's treating him poorly.

In summary I don't really see how either are being treated poorly.

It's just very cut-throat.
Not necessarily poor teatment, but ruthless

 

[Morkel]

Get this from our mate Annersley when defending the NRL in the wake of the NRL's' "cheating" drama:

“We have to remember what we’re trying to do in this game, and that is we’re trying to make sure that we improve officiating, we’re trying to make sure that the game is as open and as attractive for people to watch as possible, we want the game to be successful. It’s not going to be successful if some of the things that may have been said in the media get any traction and bring the game into disrepute.”

Basically, he mentions nothing about fairness, of rules being applied equally, of teams and players being on an even playing field. Which I would have thought would be the logical response to allegations of unfair refereeing. Instead it is a weird claim that the decisions being made are predominantly due to what are in the best interests of the game.

Sooo, if it's in the best interests of the game that certain teams are more successful, we should accept that? Sooo, if it's in the best interests of the game for certain players to be given more leeway with their actions due to their status, we should accept that? And that if the referees are given directives in order to achieve these results, we should accept that? It's insane that not once did he mention anything about fairness or equal application of the rules.

 

[Sproj]

Get this from our mate Annersley when defending the NRL in the wake of the NRL's' "cheating" drama:

“We have to remember what we’re trying to do in this game, and that is we’re trying to make sure that we improve officiating, we’re trying to make sure that the game is as open and as attractive for people to watch as possible, we want the game to be successful. It’s not going to be successful if some of the things that may have been said in the media get any traction and bring the game into disrepute.”

Basically, he mentions nothing about fairness, of rules being applied equally, of teams and players being on an even playing field. Which I would have thought would be the logical response to allegations of unfair refereeing. Instead it is a weird claim that the decisions being made are predominantly due to what are in the best interests of the game.

Sooo, if it's in the best interests of the game that certain teams are more successful, we should accept that? Sooo, if it's in the best interests of the game for certain players to be given more leeway with their actions due to their status, we should accept that? And that if the referees are given directives in order to achieve these results, we should accept that? It's insane that not once did he mention anything about fairness or equal application of the rules.

The guy is a moron. He thinks because he uses political style spin, people just buy his rubbish, which of course no one does. But don't worry, if they are found to have made a glaringly wrong decision, they'll just make up a new rule to make it right.

 

[Midean]

Get this from our mate Annersley when defending the NRL in the wake of the NRL's' "cheating" drama:

“We have to remember what we’re trying to do in this game, and that is we’re trying to make sure that we improve officiating, we’re trying to make sure that the game is as open and as attractive for people to watch as possible, we want the game to be successful. It’s not going to be successful if some of the things that may have been said in the media get any traction and bring the game into disrepute.”

Basically, he mentions nothing about fairness, of rules being applied equally, of teams and players being on an even playing field. Which I would have thought would be the logical response to allegations of unfair refereeing. Instead it is a weird claim that the decisions being made are predominantly due to what are in the best interests of the game.

Sooo, if it's in the best interests of the game that certain teams are more successful, we should accept that? Sooo, if it's in the4 best interests of the game for certain players to be given more leeway with their actions due to their status, we should accept that? And that if the referees are given directives in order to achieve these results, we should accept that? It's insane that not once did he mention anything about fairness or equal application of the rules.

This is exactly why i thought the Dolphins would win at least their first few games.
Not because They are a good team, but because it would be terrible business if they got off on the wrong foot.
Now it helps that they played well, but they could have played like shit and I would wager the refs would get them home, purely because from a business perspective, it's bad for the NRL if they strarted off on a losing streak.

This is also why hated rules like the 6 again are still with us. I have yet to meet a single person who likes the 6 again, from any club, but it is still with us because it is a rule with minimal accountability that can help to sway a game if the swaying
Is needed to ensure good business. Add to this we have the snake V'landys, God of the bookies turning the game into a gamblers whore, with the entire organization focused on milking every possible dollar out of the game, as opposed to improving the product.

 

[Midean]

What's happened to Suaalii?

Roosters saying they will release him early due to form and to get cap relief.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

Unrelated to the current conversation, but I wonder how many players will be going to the Roosters for their "culture" after the recent treatment of both Sam Walker and Joseph Sua'ali'i.

Both being totally thrown under the bus by the club in my opinion.

Culture at the Roosters is spelt culsture but the s is $ilent …

 

[Mustafur]

I don't think Union actually want him early, it's all a bluff, if he goes now that's alot of media attention potentially lost for them and they go back to being forgotten, it's a different story being linked to other NRL players when the one you got is already gone.

 

[Foordy]

we want the game to be successful.

If the NRL actually wanted the game to be successful, then everyone in the NRL management structure from Vlandys down ... would RESIGN

 

[Midean]

Shock Suaalii move to land Roosters $700k relief

Rugby switch could happen early

wwos.nine.com.au

Someone explain how releasing him early would free cap space, considering he is contracted for another year?

If Joseph wanted to honor his contract, and stay at the club, wouldn't they have to pay him out his final year regardless? So how would that free 700k in cap space?

This is what i was referring to earlier in their treatment of their players.
This and the walker situation are perfect examples of scapegoating.
Walkers form was not poor enough to warrant being dropped, and i dont think you can pin the blame on him or Sua'ali'i for Roosters run of losses this year.

They needed fall guys because Uncle Nick hates losing and is demanding answers from Robinson/The team.

 

[Xzei]

I don't think Union actually want him early, it's all a bluff, if he goes now that's alot of media attention potentially lost for them and they go back to being forgotten, it's a different story being linked to other NRL players when the one you got is already gone.

you watch the roosters not have to carry any money on the cap unlike other clubs when they move someone on

 

[Mustafur]

Shock Suaalii move to land Roosters $700k relief

Rugby switch could happen early

wwos.nine.com.au

Someone explain how releasing him early would free cap space, considering he is contracted for another year?

If Joseph wanted to honor his contract, and stay at the club, wouldn't they have to pay him out his final year regardless? So how would that free 700k in cap space?

This is what i was referring to earlier in their treatment of their players.
This and the walker situation are perfect examples of scapegoating.
Walkers form was not poor enough to warrant being dropped, and i dont think you can pin the blame on him or Sua'ali'i for Roosters run of losses this year.

They needed fall guys because Uncle Nick hates losing and is demanding answers from Robinson/The team.

Usually if you want to free cap space you move a player on to another team and how much they pay him whether it's the whole contract, part of it or more is what gets relieved from your cap.


The difference here is it's another code, but if they apply the same rule here and if Union are getting him the 1.6 Mil then it would be the whole contract off their hands free to use.

Essentially if they can release him to union and not pay a cent more of his contract and have unions contract kick in instantly that would be a fair argument to have it relieved, but if they have to pay him out to leave then it shouldn't.

 

[Midean]

Star 'ringing around' as Dragons brace for exodus

'There's definitely been something going on'

wwos.nine.com.au

I change my mind.
Bird was a worse signing than Milford.

 

[LittleDavey]

And now shit like this:

"The NRL has launched a review into the controversial betting partnership rules that have resulted in greats of the game being banned.

The rules excluding figures within the game from holding positions in the NRL while also having a link with any form of gambling have been widely debated since it was first revealed Raiders legend Laurie Daley was banned from joining Manly’s coaching staff.

The Sea Eagles were in December hoping to employ Daley in a coaching consultancy role to work with playmaker Josh Schuster, who has since struggled to find form in 2023.

But the governing body rejected the club’s official submission because Daley’s job as a co-host on Sky Sports Radio’s Big Sports Breakfast — which is owned by TAB — is a conflict of interest.

Weidler said the NRL’s rulings had cost Daley positions on the Sea Eagles and Wests Tigers coaching staff — jobs that would have been worth “hundreds of thousands” of dollars.

It was revealed last month Wests Tigers great Robbie Farah was also forced to walk away from a lucrative partnership with a start-up wagering agency because of his position as an assistant coach at the Wests Tigers."


So the NRL are going to walk back rules around people involved intimately in the game, also being intimately involved with betting agencies, because it's "forcing" them to quit their footy roles?

****. OFF.

No-one is forcing them to do anything, they have a choice. If they want to be involved in footy, then quit the other fucking jobs. If they want the other jobs, then step away from footy while you're there. How is this even a fucking issue, let alone one big enough for the NRL to water down the rules?? Talk about bringing the game into disrepute, FMD. It's a fucking viper's den of corruption.

 

[Sproj]

This management will be the death of league, maybe its already dead.

 

[I bleed Maroon]

This management will be the death of league, maybe its already dead.

Absolutely. They are the worst we've seen in modern memory. Makes Todd Greenburg look perfectly competent.

 

[broncos4life]

Absolutely. They are the worst we've seen in modern memory. Makes Todd Greenburg look perfectly competent.

Remember all the ***** that wanted Gallop gone and then Greenburg? Be careful what you wish for.