LOLZ, Farah owned by Anthony Watts

[Coxy]

Hahaha, man, what a pussy that little whingey **** from Wests Tigers is. Landed on his back by Watts. What a disgrace, he can't fight, he shouldn't play rugby league. LOLZ LOLZ LOLZ. Fights are awesome.

Kind regards,
The Rock

 

[lynx000]

*stirs the broth*

 

[OXY-351]

Coxy, on field fights ARE awesome, although I guess you'd rather go shopping for a new man bag with your bf than watch them

 

[Coxy]

No, as I said I can cope with them if we stop suspending guys for minor little high tackles, or we suspend players who fight.

This is more a dig that one of Rock's lovers got owned in a fight, considering he took great pleasure in Price being outpunched last week.

 

[OXY-351]

No, as I said I can cope with them if we stop suspending guys for minor little high tackles, or we suspend players who fight.

Valid point. I thought it was a joke yesterday that Watts didn't even get penalised for the initial fight. I'm guessing this was purely because the tigers had scored a try, and there was no rule allowign for the refs to penalise. It couldn't be considered an 8 point try could it?

On the high tackle thing, it also struck me yesterday that by being so qucik to penalise players for holding on too long when doing low tackles, they are basically forcing players to tackle high. If you tackle someone high (especially if called a dominant tackle), you are allowed to hold them down for a reasonable time, but if you tackle someone around the legs (especially in a covering/sliding tackle), you are expected to release them straight away. When was the last time such a tackle was called dominant. There is no incentive to tackle people low these days, so players are aiming higher, thus reducing the margin for error. The NRL really needs to look at implementing some rules to reward players for low tackles.

 

[Coxy]

No, as I said I can cope with them if we stop suspending guys for minor little high tackles, or we suspend players who fight.

Valid point. I thought it was a joke yesterday that Watts didn't even get penalised for the initial fight. I'm guessing this was purely because the tigers had scored a try, and there was no rule allowign for the refs to penalise. It couldn't be considered an 8 point try could it?

On the high tackle thing, it also struck me yesterday that by being so qucik to penalise players for holding on too long when doing low tackles, they are basically forcing players to tackle high. If you tackle someone high (especially if called a dominant tackle), you are allowed to hold them down for a reasonable time, but if you tackle someone around the legs (especially in a covering/sliding tackle), you are expected to release them straight away. When was the last time such a tackle was called dominant. There is no incentive to tackle people low these days, so players are aiming higher, thus reducing the margin for error. The NRL really needs to look at implementing some rules to reward players for low tackles.

Absolutely. And if you get the legs originally and then try and hold down higher up, you're "working them".

On the initial Watts fight, no, it couldn't be an 8 point try because the wording on that is that the foul has to occur in the act of scoring a try. "The act of scoring a try" is literally defined as forcing the ball, and it would have to be on the try scorer.

Frankly it's a dumb rule. I think any penalty that can be ruled on the try scoring play should also be able to be awarded. So they would've got the try, the conversion and then take a shot at goal from where the fight occurred.

Plus I reckon the penalty shot should be optional. Take a shot at 2 points, or you can take a penalty kick from half way instead of a kickoff, so instead of getting the ball on your own goal line from the kick off, you're potentially on the attack again 20 metres out.

 

[mrslong]

How the hell did the Tigers get the penalty when everyone could see Farah was getting a square up? They should have got an 8 point try, then the Cowboys should have got the penalty. Seriously, what terrible reffing!!!

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

Its pretty stupid that you can just start a fight with someone like watts did and stay on the field and not give away a penalty. Should start the biff everytime a fight is scored from now on.

Farah got him back tho, 10 fold IMO. He was bleeding and bruised all over his face lol

 

[Kimlo]

Farah got him hard lol.
I don't blame him I would of done the same thing. He took a cheap shot punch and there wasn't even a penalty awarded so when he squared it up they got the penalty haha.

 

[Anonymous person]

I think Watts won overall. Sure Farrah got him with a fair few punches, but he had him on the ground and was laying into him. Watts on the other hand only needed a single punch to lay Farrah out on his back.

I was amazed that Watts wasn't penalised though. How could that oversight have happened? They either penalise Watts and therefor have to disallow the Tigers try, or they award the try and Watts goes unpunished. They need to sort that little loop-hole out.

OXY-351, in regards to tackling: a dominant tackle is, by the rules, called when the defender stops ALL forward momentum of the attacking player on first contact. Like it or not, this is nearly impossible to do with a 'around the legs' tackle. If the attacking player gets his legs cut out from under him by a defender but he falls over forwards, thats NOT a dominant tackle by the rule book.

Lets face it - the 'dominant tackle' rule was introduced to reward big hits, because that's what fills the highlight reals and gets the public interested.

 

[Coxy]

Watts should've been sin binned.

 

[Anonymous person]

Watts should've been sin binned.

Queensland should've been awarded 2 penalty tries in Origin 3 too, but the referees these days seem to think the rules of the game are more of a suggestion than a rule.

 

[OXY-351]

OXY-351, in regards to tackling: a dominant tackle is, by the rules, called when the defender stops ALL forward momentum of the attacking player on first contact. Like it or not, this is nearly impossible to do with a 'around the legs' tackle. If the attacking player gets his legs cut out from under him by a defender but he falls over forwards, thats NOT a dominant tackle by the rule book.

By the current rules, it's probably not a dominant tackle, but I think the rules need to be changed to give some sort of reward for low tackles in some circumstances. Take Kimmorleys covering tackle on Inglis in the Origin for example. It was a magnificent tackle, but had Kimmorley not put Inglis over the sideline, he would have basically had to release him straight away. Sometimes I feel that there is too much emphasis on attack these days. In that instance, Kimmorley should have been rewarded for making such a tackle

 

[Kimlo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAbQSuCjK7Q

Watts took a cheap shot and took Farah off guard, any off guard shot to your chin and 9/10 times you'll drop so I can't agree he got the better of him there Anonymous person. I'd say Watts got owned and deserved every punch he got for taking a cheap shot on a person not expecting it.

 

[Coxy]

Translation: Farah is lebanese and can do no wrong. Watts is a dirty ranga celt pagan bastard.

 

[Kimlo]

Translation: Farah is lebanese and can do no wrong. Watts is a dirty ranga celt pagan bastard.

[eusa_doh How did I forget, if I happen to defend Farah it must be because he's leb!

 

[Coxy]

Your creaming over Farah and El Masri is pretty obvious mate ;-)

 

[Kimlo]

El Masri is very popular, he has a huge amount of supporters, just look at how many comments and congratulations he got on his retirement announcement and having a page on the official NRL website. http://www.nrl.com/NRLHome/HazemElMasri ... fault.aspx for his retirement and I've spoke to him in person before, he's also from the same hometown as me so of course I like him, he's done a lot for the community and is a great role model so I can't see reason not to admire him :) Farah on the other hand, I'm not a huge fan of Farah, I think he's an awesome player and a decent guy but that's it.