NEWS Brisbane to Bennett: it's not you, it's us

Morkel said:
It's pretty fucking obviosu to me what the "intent" of the rule changes were. The complete ability for games to be controlled remotely and to an agenda. Removing one of the refs, introducing rulings that happen so quickly there is zero scrutiny able to be applied via replays, and putting unprecedented conrol in to the hands of the bunker does exactly what the NRL wants - to control games and make sure the teams that they deem as strategically important succeed.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's that devious, I think they just wanted a fast open 20/20 version of football. I didn't think they knew the affect on the game it would have and they thought it would be make it close and fast. It's gone too far the attacking way- just like 20/20 is too far the batsman.

In fairness for 20 years people said we don't want wrestle we want quick play the balls with attack and fatigue and that's what they now have.

But what it's done is make the gap between the terrible teams and the top four wider than I would have expected.

I thought it was like NYC but it's even gone past that because momentum would swing back with those games and they'd end up 32-28. At the moment in the NRL their is no swing back it just goes and goes.
 
1910 said:
I don't think it's that devious, I think they just wanted a fast open 20/20 version of football. I didn't think they knew the affect on the game it would have and they thought it would be make it close and fast. It's gone too far the attacking way- just like 20/20 is too far the batsman.

In fairness for 20 years people said we don't want wrestle we want quick play the balls with attack and fatigue and that's what they now have.

But what it's done is make the gap between the terrible teams and the top four wider than I would have expected.

I thought it was like NYC but it's even gone past that because momentum would swing back with those games and they'd end up 32-28. At the moment in the NRL their is no swing back it just goes and goes.
Click to expand...

The logic in this still makes me so mad.

It's like having a skin cancer on your arm which you want to remove, and instead of cutting it off, you take untested drugs which are full of awful side effects and make you sick to help try to minimise the tumour size.

If you don't want wrestle in the game THEN REMOVE THE WRESTLE FROM THE GAME, don't butcher the rest of the game trying to overcome the wrestle.
 
HarryAllan7 said:
The logic in this still makes me so mad.

It's like having a skin cancer on your arm which you want to remove, and instead of cutting it off, you take untested drugs which are full of awful side effects and make you sick to help try to minimise the tumour size.

If you don't want wrestle in the game THEN REMOVE THE WRESTLE FROM THE GAME, don't butcher the rest of the game trying to overcome the wrestle.
Click to expand...

That's probably a fair point, but I don't think they knew what the end result would be. Well I am hoping they didn't know.
 
HarryAllan7 said:
The logic in this still makes me so mad.

It's like having a skin cancer on your arm which you want to remove, and instead of cutting it off, you take untested drugs which are full of awful side effects and make you sick to help try to minimise the tumour size.

If you don't want wrestle in the game THEN REMOVE THE WRESTLE FROM THE GAME, don't butcher the rest of the game trying to overcome the wrestle.
Click to expand...
They don’t understand the game. If they did they would not only penalise wrestling, but also make players play the ball on the mark, straight and with their foot, all existing rules that organically slow the play the ball down, if enforced.

Instead they continue to water the rules down to the point now that every second play the ball is metres away from where the tackle was made and instead of penalising them for playing it off the mark, the ones they do pull up are given another chance to do it properly! They are professional players, they know the rules, they are doing it deliberately to gain an illegal advantage knowing full well the only punishment they will get is to go back and do it again! And now with this set restart rubbish the markers who actually hold the mark are the ones penalised for interfering at the ruck.
 
People and their need for high scoring games pisses me off! The most popular sport in the world “soccer” football whatever you want to call it regularly has 1 or 2 goal games. They still haven’t stopped the wrestling, are the play the balls any faster?
 
nopatience101 said:
They don’t understand the game. If they did they would not only penalise wrestling, but also make players play the ball on the mark, straight and with their foot, all things that organically slow the play the ball down, if enforced

Instead they continue to water the rules down to the point now that every second play the ball is metres away from where the tackle was made and instead of penalising them for playing it off the mark, the ones they do pull up are given another chance to do it properly! They are professional players, they know the rules, they are doing it deliberately to gain an illegal advantage knowing full well the only punishment they will get is to go back and do it again! And now with this set restart rubbish the markers who actually hold the mark are the ones penalised for interfering at the ruck.
Click to expand...
Also when they call held and then proceed to tackle the player to the ground….ahhh no you’re supposed to just let go.
 
Galah said:
Also when they call held and then proceed to tackle the player to the ground….ahhh no you’re supposed to just let go.
Click to expand...
You’re allowed one more movement(whatever that is?) in the tackle once held is called.
 
All you had to do was ref according to the rules, they did it and it was glorious and then Gould complained and that was the end of that.

Then they bring in the six again on the theory of cutting down the wrestle but then forget to penalise the team that does it the most - Melbourne.
 
nopatience101 said:
They don’t understand the game. If they did they would not only penalise wrestling, but also make players play the ball on the mark, straight and with their foot, all existing rules that organically slow the play the ball down, if enforced.

Instead they continue to water the rules down to the point now that every second play the ball is metres away from where the tackle was made and instead of penalising them for playing it off the mark, the ones they do pull up are given another chance to do it properly! They are professional players, they know the rules, they are doing it deliberately to gain an illegal advantage knowing full well the only punishment they will get is to go back and do it again! And now with this set restart rubbish the markers who actually hold the mark are the ones penalised for interfering at the ruck.
Click to expand...
The playing the ball on the mark is so bad at the moment and has not been identified by anyone in the media, so in turn will not be addressed by the NRL.

JAC from the storm is the worst at this. He always takes a step to the side and at least one step forward when he plays it, putting the marker out of play. Then this marker is either called out of play or penalised if they get involved. It shits me something severe.
 
NSW stables said:
The playing the ball on the mark is so bad at the moment and has not been identified by anyone in the media, so in turn will not be addressed by the NRL.

JAC from the storm is the worst at this. He always takes a step to the side and at least one step forward when he plays it, putting the marker out of play. Then this marker is either called out of play or penalised if they get involved. It shits me something severe.
Click to expand...
Most frustrating thing in the game and has been for years.
 
Huge said:
Not disagreeing here but your last line absolutely supports my contention that image and reality can be and are different in WBs case. He was never happy in the spotlight and that's way different to being a narcissist, a power driven personality or indicative of an inflated ego. WB adapted, was in truth forced to adapt to a public persona and through repetition became a master. Doubtless he received advice along the way and being an intelligent man knew he didn't know it all and took useful advice on board.

WB's outer shell was formed largely through necessity. I believe a lot of what we fans see is a WB construct built specifically to protect himself and further I believe he realised he could protect(shield) others. Hence the relationship with media types. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer still. What better way to control the narrative? I still think he's a very private man with a generous heart. I think I'd be proud if I could call him, a mate.
Click to expand...
I dunno. People change and sometimes the more selfish part in us wins out. Wayno is indeed a smart bloke and definitely is capable of justifying to himself and the public the reasons for many things, but does that make him a good bloke or a weasel?
I mean, is his shying from the media out of reluctance or disdain? Does he make decisions for the betterment of everyone, or just himself and hope/proclaim that they parallel with those of the many?
For many years he has been worshipped and praised, paid well and been given almost free reign on everything he does, surely that touches the ego more than he himself even suspects.
I'm sure he's nice enough to those he likes, but to those he doesn't...
 
Organix said:
I dunno. People change and sometimes the more selfish part in us wins out. Wayno is indeed a smart bloke and definitely is capable of justifying to himself and the public the reasons for many things, but does that make him a good bloke or a weasel?
I mean, is his shying from the media out of reluctance or disdain? Does he make decisions for the betterment of everyone, or just himself and hope/proclaim that they parallel with those of the many?
For many years he has been worshipped and praised, paid well and been given almost free reign on everything he does, surely that touches the ego more than he himself even suspects.
I'm sure he's nice enough to those he likes, but to those he doesn't...
Click to expand...
I don't know the answer to this 100% accurately, but I would say older family members knew Wayne a little bit way back when and never had a bad word to say about the man. From what I've been told the private and public personas are quite different and those close to him generally hold him in very high regard so it would generally align with @Huge's position.
 
soup said:
There’s another side to him that rubs people the wrong way, and has since he was a teenager apparently. Always carried himself to be above everyone else, distancing the community.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it isn't the case, just it's not been that way for my family.
 
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 555
1:24:45
NRL Round 10, 2005 - North Queensland Cowboys vs Brisbane Broncos
View full media list »

Active Now

  • Big Del
  • Aldo
  • BroncoFan94
  • mystico
  • simplythebest
  • broncsgoat
  • Wolfie
  • Xzei
Total: 88 (members: 13, guests: 75)
Robots: 178
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.