NRL Round 20 Discussion

[BroncsFan]

So dodgy calls cost Newcastle and St George this round. I guess all four refs are in line for a promotion.

And favoured the top 4 teams... a challenge was needed for the favourable call to go manly's way otherwise theyre trying to beat storm in a shoot out... which they mightve still done, but not sure i give them a huge hope in that situation

 

[Super Freak]

I knew the goal kicking was going to coat the Knights.

 

[Dexter]

And favoured the top 4 teams... a challenge was needed for the favourable call to go manly's way otherwise theyre trying to beat storm in a shoot out... which they mightve still done, but not sure i give them a huge hope in that situation

Pretty sure they can challenge foul play which is what they did. Then the entire play gets reviewed .

 

[Super Freak]

Warriors still have some very tough games coming up and they’re showing signs of cracking.

Knights should have won but they’re shit.

All we need to worry about right now is winning at least 6 from our next 7 and hope results go our way.

 

[The Don]

I'd be ropeable if I was a Titans supporter. I'm not sure who'd I'd be more pissed with - that left edge of Kelly and Sami making rookie mistakes, the official gifting the Tigers some pivotal penalties that led directly to points or Des and his selections.

Just no luck whatsoever, Tino does his knee inside the first ten minutes and is virtually gone from that point on. They need a big game player and yet they keep Fifita on the bench until the final twenty minutes. It was now or never, if you don't trust your million dollar forward to rise up, then don't play him.

There's just no variation to the Titans play and even when they go off script they get it wrong.

I don't see Des lasting. They may as well make the call now, bring an interim in, loosen the reigns, actually make use of their 17 players and make some big calls heading into next season.

I don't know what to think anymore. Des bench use makes him look mentally challenged and then some of the players are just deadset idiots too. Watching Des and Bec Frizelle fuming at least gives me some hope they're going to put the broom through the joint. Don't love the coaching options anyway so almost happy to watch Des spray these gumbies for another year.

Sidenote: at least from what I caught JC looked bloody good.

 

[I bleed Maroon]

****ing Newcastle lol Absolutely unreal choke.

 

[Sproj]

Warriors still have some very tough games coming up and they’re showing signs of cracking.

Knights should have won but they’re shit.

All we need to worry about right now is winning at least 6 from our next 7 and hope results go our way.

We have two annual Storm losses coming, we aren't winning 6 of 7.

 

[BroncsFan]

Pretty sure they can challenge foul play which is what they did. Then the entire play gets reviewed .

They can challenge foul play, which didn't even happen, but the bunker isn't allowed to look at discretionary calls.

How many times have there been markers blatantly not square or people well offside on the goal line, but a team never challenges it or that call is never made on a challenge even if it happens... because if they were allowed to they'd get the call all the time and captains would be challenging them all the time.

The NRL now need to come out and confirm one way or another... if they want to suddenly open it up for markers not square, offside, etc. then it will be a complete shit show... they'll probably just ignore it and hope that it goes away... but teams like the storm would've seen that today and taken notes that marker not square is on the menu.

Also the original rules around the captains challenge included that they couldn't challenge for foul play... because there'd be too many times where a touch is found to be slightly high and the bunker would have no choice but to award the penalty... just like DWZ's today... but NRL decided to ignore that rule in the game we lost to rorters when Teddy challenge on a whim and the bunker found a finger on Tupouniua's chin and gave them a kick to win the game... and now it has seemingly disappeared off the face of the earth.

Although every now and then a bunker will throw out a "the contact is high, but it's incidental"... who even knows what that means, but they've decided to give themselves a get out clause... but only if they decide they want to use it, because it doesn't come out all the time.

 

[tommy]

Could a challenge have occurred if the ball didn't go dead? Out of curiosity?

 

[Brocko]

Let's be real, if challenging 'anything' meant they went back and reviewed everything from that tackle from play the ball through, youd find someone offside, someone not square, a roll ball or something to penalise each and every time, which is why I assume captains challenge isnt usually used that way.

NRL should come out and clarify now what the review process entails on a captains challenge. When a knock on is challenged, they dont go back and check for markers square or everyone onside, so if they only checked today because it was a field goal, tell everyone that.

 

[BroncsFan]

Could a challenge have occurred if the ball didn't go dead? Out of curiosity?

Nope... if the fullback had just fielded the ball and returned it then there's no stoppage and no challenge can occur.

Although wahs probably would've been yelling at the ref "foul play", "contacted leg", "he touched it", whatever they could yell to try and pressure the ref into referring it up to the bunker even though they didn't know anything had happened... they just wanted a miracle to come from the bunker... and it came... except Tanah ****ed it

 

[BroncsFan]

Let's be real, if challenging 'anything' meant they went back and reviewed everything from that tackle from play the ball through, youd find someone offside, someone not square, a roll ball or something to penalise each and every time, which is why I assume captains challenge isnt usually used that way.

NRL should come out and clarify now what the review process entails on a captains challenge. When a knock on is challenged, they dont go back and check for markers square or everyone onside, so if they only checked today because it was a field goal, tell everyone that.

They're probably scrambling to try and figure out some sort of excuse.

They really shouldn't say that because the field goal was challenged they looked at markers not square, etc.

Teams are never onside on a field goal... if they open up that challenges on field goals mean the bunker can look at not square and offsides... then teams will be looking to challenge almost any missed field goal and flagging those things for the bunker to check.

Unfortunately the NRL is ****ing stupid and way too stubborn to just say that the bunker over reached.

 

[Super Freak]

We have two annual Storm losses coming, we aren't winning 6 of 7.

I know.

That’s how much we need to win at the very least to have any chance of top 4.

 

[JayPee]

I'm glad the Warriors got that call. Marzhew did his best Phil Waugh impression in the first half. Balanced out shit calls. Gagai kicks a goal they probably win.

 

[Battler]

They can challenge foul play, which didn't even happen, but the bunker isn't allowed to look at discretionary calls.

How many times have there been markers blatantly not square or people well offside on the goal line, but a team never challenges it or that call is never made on a challenge even if it happens... because if they were allowed to they'd get the call all the time and captains would be challenging them all the time.

The NRL now need to come out and confirm one way or another... if they want to suddenly open it up for markers not square, offside, etc. then it will be a complete shit show... they'll probably just ignore it and hope that it goes away... but teams like the storm would've seen that today and taken notes that marker not square is on the menu.

Also the original rules around the captains challenge included that they couldn't challenge for foul play... because there'd be too many times where a touch is found to be slightly high and the bunker would have no choice but to award the penalty... just like DWZ's today... but NRL decided to ignore that rule in the game we lost to rorters when Teddy challenge on a whim and the bunker found a finger on Tupouniua's chin and gave them a kick to win the game... and now it has seemingly disappeared off the face of the earth.

Although every now and then a bunker will throw out a "the contact is high, but it's incidental"... who even knows what that means, but they've decided to give themselves a get out clause... but only if they decide they want to use it, because it doesn't come out all the time.

If you can challenge markers/ offsides then the storm, riff, and dogs are in severe trouble come the finals.

 

[BroncsFan]

If you can challenge markers/ offsides then the storm, riff, and dogs are in severe trouble come the finals.

You forget that NRL just goes gaslight mode and will throw out "markers are onside"... even if they're closer to the ball than the dummy half... and there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it.

 

[Big Del]

So there's the bronco rule being ignored.

Didn't Staggs cop a penalty a couple weeks back for "not clearing the ruck" when he stole it from dummy half because there was no one there?

And the only other time I've ever seen it called was against Herbie when he was a bronco.

Titans just now did the exact same thing... Api was completely oblivious of the ptb and titans player went and dived on it and never bothered trying to get to his feet... ref calls it play on... which is what happens on 99% of those incidents.

It is 100% of those incidents, but broncos getting penalised drags down the average

You can step around and pick up the ball .
But ,,, you must be square at marker and you can`t dive on the ball / surrender .

Seen the dive in from marker penalised in the past .

Kotoni was not square and dived on the ball .

 

[BroncsFan]

You can step around and pick up the ball .
But ,,, you must be square at marker and you can`t dive on the ball / surrender .

Seen the dive in from marker penalised in the past .

Kotoni was not square and dived on the ball .

I'm pretty sure they called not clearing the ruck on Staggs, but even then Herbie definitely was because it was a ptb on the 1m... he was on the goal line and they had no one at marker.

Penalty, because reasons.