Game 3 - Post Match Discussion

[QUEENSLANDER]

Woods is NSW's Josh McGuire. Would be good to see them square off.

Disagree. McGuire is fitter, faster and has more in his attacking arsenal. Woods is a solid prop and should be picked for nsw next year but he lacks the x-factor that mcguire has

 

[Ari Gold]

Disagree. McGuire is fitter, faster and has more in his attacking arsenal. Woods is a solid prop and should be picked for nsw next year but he lacks the x-factor that mcguire has

Well he did NSW's version, so of course he's going to be inferior.

 

[Big Pete]

I can see the similarities but they're fairly different too.

Woods concentrates more on his size to get over the defensive line while McGuire uses his acceleration & mobility.

And not that you see much of it at this level but McGuire is actually a good ball player. It'd be in our interest to develop that part of his game.

 

[Professor47]

Solid team there FORCE.

Honestly, they have to get LYON to play somehow.

A fit T-REX and T SIMS off the bench ... they do have the team to win it. No doubt about that. They've got the young guns.

 

[broncos4life]

Woods is NSW's Josh McGuire. Would be good to see them square off.

Disagree. If you have to compare Big Show to anyone it's Gallen. Similar build, toughness and the mobility that Gallen has.

 

[Dexter]

As predicted, the obstruction rule is causing a lot of confusion.

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8512447

 

[The Brizz]

Even though they are bringing the Hodges try up I am backing this is more directly aimed at putting pressure on the Video Referee on the Hasler/Bulldogs obstruction plays. I don't see the big deal, bodies in motion and quality passing and no one ever actually gets obstructed they just get confused which is the beauty of those plays when they are done well.

 

[Dexter]

The ref interpretations are the problem IMO and Harrigan won't admit there is a problem with the wording.

Take b) for instance, once a ball runner runs behind another player and causes the defender to misread that is an advantage.
It makes no reference to obstruction or decoys runners or anything else, so the question becomes, what is an advantage?

What is or or is not an advantage is not defined, IMO a misread caused by running behind your team mate is an advantage, others see it differently.



a) It is the responsibility of the decoy runner/s not to interfere with the defending team.
b) The ball runner cannot run behind his own team and gain an advantage.
c) A sweep player may receive the ball on the inside of a block runner as long as there
is depth on the pass to him. It there is no depth he needs to receive the ball on the
outside of the block runner.
d) Defensive decisions that commit defenders to decoy runners will not be considered
obstruction.
e) Attacking players who loiter next to the play the ball can be interpreted as
obstructing the defending team.
f) In the process of scoring a try an attacking player dives through or into the legs of
the player who has played the ball a penalty will be awarded to the defending team.
This action will be interpreted as obstruction.
g) If in the opinion of the referee/video referee the play had no effect on the
scoring of the try the try will be awarded.

 

[Coxy]

I've seen numerous occasions where players run behind teammates in the last couple of rounds, and go on to score tries or make breaks. Nothing even said.

 

[Browny]

Unless gus is commentating

 

[OXY-351]

Unless gus is commentating

I love it how even Rabs tells him to let it go

 

[Dexter]

So have I Coxy, but if you apply the refs guidelines as they are written then in most cases you wouldn't get past b). The play would not pass that guideline but when you read that guideline in conjunction with d) and g) that is where the confusion is happening.

 

[Kaz]

I love it how even Rabs tells him to let it go

And Gus says no.