Headline updates - Stuart off to meet ref bosses.. AGAIN

Discussion in 'State of Origin 2012' started by anzac7, Jul 6, 2012.



    Bird would be. I know you said team, and i took that into consideration. It would be Bird, Blues then Maroons in that order.

    Deadset the guy smacks his first into the back of his opponent every time he tackles them. I literally just watched the game moments ago with this article fresh in my mind. Bird did it over and over. Hope the dirty prick tore his pec and wont see another game this year coz thats all he deserves.
  2. It's unsportsmanlike...

  3. :-P
  4. Dexter


    Not to ignite the whole argument again because it's pointless but just to highlight how confusing that rule is.

    I have spoken to heaps of ppl since Wed all ex footy players and coaches etc 4 of them have played SoO for Qld 2 for Aus and every one of them say that was a shepherd. I change my mind probably every time I watch it but my gut says shepherd.

    We all say the same thing, we know the rule has changed but to us that has always been a shepherd.
    They have taken a simple rule and complicated it so now the ruling on such tries will depend on who is sitting in the box.

    What about the other 99.9% of footy games that don't have video refs or even a second ref to decipher who ran where and what was a bad read etc. Coaches will be working on plays now that run more than 1 decoy and playing the runner with depth, it has opened a can of worms.

    I will be very surprised if this rule doesn't get tweaked again pretty soon to change that play to a shepherd.
  5. The word shepherd isn't in the rulebook
  6. Dexter


    They should put it back in
  7. Ref I spoke to said the word has never been in the rule book.
  8. Dexter


    I couldn't say to be honest, has he got a rule book from the 80s?. You know what I'm getting at no matter what it's called, until recently when they introduced refs guidelines this was all a simple matter IMO they should have let it be.
  9. The nsw whinging is that they only trained to defend that where the player doesn't run behind. If the rule allowed it, then it's poor coaching and poor reading the play.

    There's lots of times players run behind teammates in a game. The stupid thing is if Hodges passed and got it in the run around nobody would argue.

    I'm fine with the rule as it madness defence harder.
  10. Dexter


    Fair enough Coxy we'll start to go round in circles now, to me that will always be a shepherd. If the rules say it isn't us old blokes will have to adjust our thinking the same way we've had to with the dominant tackle crap but that is the game evolving I guess.

    I still think there will be a clarification of some type before the end of the season.
  11. ningnangnong

    ningnangnong HACK THE PLANET!!!

    Not the greatest example, but when I used to play footy of a lunchtime in primary school with all my mates, we used to call a shepherd if the player in possession ran behind the same team-mate twice. Once was okay, but to double up and go back wasn't. This amazing diagram will illustrate it:


    Example on the left is okay, but the one on the right isn't. Shaded triangle represents the player in possession obviously.

    That was our interpretation of the rules as 10-12 year olds. :haha:
  12. I'm sure there will be, because the dinosaurs and NSWRL who can't accept that the new interpretation is fine will go back to the hard and fast rule that you can't run behind a teammate. So you're going to basically outlaw an arc-like run and make decoy runners even less useful.
  13. Bucking Beads

    Bucking Beads International Captain

    Found this in the Sunday mail
  14. Kaz

    Kaz State of Origin Captain

    On the Sunday Footy Show, numbnuts Fittler said, if the rules were changed, they should have sent out a memo.


    There would have been a memo sent out, it's just the Blues ignored it or forgot about the change & instead of tackling Hodges, they threw their hands in the air.
  15. anzac7

    anzac7 NYC Player

    I suppose marching off to meet the refs is not counted as whinging... it was like he was happy as long as everyone knew the blues 'should' have won, but when the refs said the Hodges try was legit, he suddenly became very upset and wanted to meet them etc...
  16. Kaz

    Kaz State of Origin Captain

    If I was Bill Harrigan or Stuart Raper, I would be applying for an AVO against Stuart.

    I thought the refs for Origin 3 were 'picked' by Stuart.
  17. anzac7

    anzac7 NYC Player

    Exactly! lol! They were picked by him and kept after their promising performance of game 2.

    Seriously, most calls went NSW way in game 3 anyway - still not enough for ol Ricky but hey.
  18. dukey

    dukey NRL Player

    Stuart is the kind of coach that I can see meeting with the referees after every game, regardless of the result. He's a bit obsessive.
  19. anzac7

    anzac7 NYC Player

    lol.. maybe he secretly wants to ref the SOO game :) Then he can get exactly what he wants.

Share This Page