CROSS FORUM NRL 2023 Round 25 Discussion

[Sproj]

So, that wasn't a dangerous tackle? Bet you'd change your mind if it happened to your darling little fullback.

You are obviously not old enough to remember, or you have selective dementia, because it happened in 2017 to another Manly fullback, Tom Turbo, and it was against your mob. The injury put Turbo out of the match. There was much controversy about the ridiculous rule at the time because it means whenever a player is in the air - such as from a grubber kick or a ricochet - you can take out their legs.
Manly will get the usual "we're sorry, we got it wrong" apology from the NRL for the second match in a row, and will wait until a similar incident happens to one of the favoured clubs before it changes the rule.

This isn't a go at your club, though your club was dumb enough to sign Seibub, so maybe it is a go against your club.

 

[Big Pete]

Did the NRL apologise to Manly over the Turbo incident? I thought they said it was fair game, like smashing a bloke with your head, taking them off with an HIA under the guise of a 'head clash'.

 

[Silvertails.net]

This isn't a go at your club, though your club was dumb enough to sign Seibub, so maybe it is a go against your club.

Our club has made plenty of bad decisions and it is no longer the powerhouse it was since Penn took ownership. 'Boldy' as I call him is polarising, but he finally had the balls to call out a dud call and it has enhanced his credibility.
True Manly fans acknowledge that we are now just a battling suburban club with a tight-arse owner that will never be able to compete with wealthy clubs. However, it is amazing how Manly rarely wins penalty counts and gets rorted by refs.

 

[Silvertails.net]

Did the NRL apologise to Manly over the Turbo incident? I thought they said it was fair game, like smashing a bloke with your head, taking them off with an HIA under the guise of a 'head clash'.

The NRL apologises to Manly so often they now simply replay a recorded message.

 

[Big Pete]

The NRL apologises to Manly so often they now simply replay a recorded message.

So in other words, no.

It sucks that your season is over and it's frustrating to see the direction of your club but if you were being honest with yourself you'd realise Manly got some very influential calls as well. The Metcalf no try, the Saab try off a forward pass etc.

 

[ZTop]

In other news this tigers vs phins game is shaping to be absolutely shit house. API in the halves for tigpies and then Wayne's decided to put out the rookie team

Good luck tipping this one

 

[Big Pete]

In other news this tigers vs phins game is shaping to be absolutely shit house. API in the halves for tigpies and then Wayne's decided to put out the rookie team

Good luck tipping this one

Bennett didn't have much choice. The only players he dropped were Milford & Te Whare, the rest are all unavailable.

I can't imagine Ben Te'o is thrilled. Redcliffe need to win today to secure a Top 4 spot, otherwise they'll be hoping the Tigers and the Magpies do them a solid.

 

[Super Freak]

So, that wasn't a dangerous tackle? Bet you'd change your mind if it happened to your darling little fullback.

No, it wasn't.

The ball bounced, that means players are allowed to be tackled mid-air. There doesn't need to be a wrapping motion on legs when doing so, and he landed on his back.

It was completely legal.

Mead's tackle on Turbo back in '17 was more dangerous than that, still a legal tackle.

 

[Browny]

Umm how was it not a dangerous tackle

 

[ZTop]

Umm how was it not a dangerous tackle

I can't see how it can be penalised under the law of the game, so I'm happy to live with it.

But what makes it ridiculous if you compare it to that time gamble was sinbinned for essentially tackling too hard

 

[Big Pete]

Umm how was it not a dangerous tackle

The ball bounced and Garrick landed safely.

I'd argue that CNK's tackle was worse than Mead's. Mostly because he didn't play for Brisbane, but also because he didn't have any control of the tackle, whereas Mead did.

 

[Silvertails.net]

No, it wasn't.

The ball bounced, that means players are allowed to be tackled mid-air. There doesn't need to be a wrapping motion on legs when doing so, and he landed on his back.

It was completely legal.

From the rule book:
“Careless” indicates that the player has not exercised due caution in making a play. “Reckless” means that the player has made unnatural movements designed to intimidate an opponent or to gain an unfair advantage.

The tackler has even admitted he was careless, and has apoligized. It wasn't intentional, but all careless tackles are unintentional. This careless tackle also became a dangerous one and could have crippled Garrick.
It is forgeable to be a biased supporter but your defence of this tackle being OK is childish.

 

[Fozz]

I think it's a dumb rule. If you take out the legs of a player in the air, should be a penalty.

 

[Wolfie]

In other news this tigers vs phins game is shaping to be absolutely shit house. API in the halves for tigpies and then Wayne's decided to put out the rookie team

Good luck tipping this one

Think they have 6 or 7 injuries.

 

[Wolfie]

Phins look a very tired football team.

 

[Big Pete]

Ball Kodi!

Impressive work from Katoa in the lead-up.

 

[ZTop]

I'm so sick of these blatantly forward passes

 

[Fozz]

Don Vlandys looking at the Tigers/Dolphins game and thinking "I don't know what the fans are complaining about, more more more!