NRL 2026 Round 1 Discussion

Elbows said:
What I found amazing was both sides couldn’t construct a set to work for a shot at a field goal
Click to expand...
Especially the dogs, far out they had enough opportunities and then some. But really it never should have been in that situation. Bulldogs showed they don't have the confidence to back themselves in attack going the safe route with penalty goals too often when they had the momentum. Dragons did well defensively but really the Dogs showed why they aren't real premiership contenders.
 
Ciraldo said a few calls went against them when he was told Flanno was unhappy with the ref. Ya love to see it.
 
Wow the NRL got the PR out quickly about the loose carry decision.
 
Burns - 2 weeks
Crichton - Not cited
Frizell - Fine
Tuipulotu - Fine

JUDICIARY WATCH

Both teams had players under the microscope of the match review committee, with Christian Tuipulotu (shoulder charge) and Toby Couchman (dangerous tackle) placed on report for the Dragons.

Tuipulotu was hit with a grade one shoulder charge but is only facing a fine regardless of whether he takes the early guilty plea or not.

Crichton, meanwhile, was not placed on report but was penalised for a high shot on a sliding Tu.

The NRL though clearly deemed there to be no issue with the tackle after re-watching the game, with Crichton not even cited on the match review committee’s charge sheet.
 
Brocko said:
Burns - 2 weeks
Crichton - Not cited
Frizell - Fine
Tuipulotu - Fine

JUDICIARY WATCH

Both teams had players under the microscope of the match review committee, with Christian Tuipulotu (shoulder charge) and Toby Couchman (dangerous tackle) placed on report for the Dragons.

Tuipulotu was hit with a grade one shoulder charge but is only facing a fine regardless of whether he takes the early guilty plea or not.

Crichton, meanwhile, was not placed on report but was penalised for a high shot on a sliding Tu.

The NRL though clearly deemed there to be no issue with the tackle after re-watching the game, with Crichton not even cited on the match review committee’s charge sheet.
Click to expand...

How do these compare with Cleary's high shot? I didn't watch any games live and have only seen Crichton's on replay.
 
Morkel said:
How do these compare with Cleary's high shot? I didn't watch any games live and have only seen Crichton's on replay.
Click to expand...
Burns was the closest to Cleary's. So I really hope he/Cows challenge it. They can basically use the exact same points to argue the grade that Cleary did.

Crichton's, attacker was falling but he still got him. Bit odd he wasn't even cited.

Frizell was a cannonball from memory, and Tuipulotu a shoulder charge so not comparable.
 
Crichton was in a falling tackle but swinging arm.
Tuipolotu was an outside in winger jamming which they have been harsh on putting all the responsibility on the tackler.
Strange he gets only a fine.
The judiciary is going to be a lottery this yesr
 
Brocko said:
Burns - 2 weeks
Crichton - Not cited
Frizell - Fine
Tuipulotu - Fine

JUDICIARY WATCH

Both teams had players under the microscope of the match review committee, with Christian Tuipulotu (shoulder charge) and Toby Couchman (dangerous tackle) placed on report for the Dragons.

Tuipulotu was hit with a grade one shoulder charge but is only facing a fine regardless of whether he takes the early guilty plea or not.

Crichton, meanwhile, was not placed on report but was penalised for a high shot on a sliding Tu.

The NRL though clearly deemed there to be no issue with the tackle after re-watching the game, with Crichton not even cited on the match review committee’s charge sheet.
Click to expand...
So the Dogs are this year's 2014 Souths when it comes to refereeing?
 
Brocko said:
Burns was the closest to Cleary's. So I really hope he/Cows challenge it. They can basically use the exact same points to argue the grade that Cleary did.

Crichton's, attacker was falling but he still got him. Bit odd he wasn't even cited.

Frizell was a cannonball from memory, and Tuipulotu a shoulder charge so not comparable.
Click to expand...

Burns problem is that he can't use the I'm Nathan Cleary defence
 
Foordy said:
Burns problem is that he can't use the I'm Nathan Cleary defence
Click to expand...
Riccio when defending this on 360 tonight "Guys why are we even talking about this... for me these two incidents are polar opposites... firstly if we look at the jerseys, Burns is clearly not wearing a panthers jersey... and if we take a look up in the box Ivan Cleary is not sitting there as coach. They are completely different and I don't think they can provide a defence to overturn it."
 
BroncsFan said:
Riccio when defending this on 360 tonight "Guys why are we even talking about this... for me these two incidents are polar opposites... firstly if we look at the jerseys, Burns is clearly not wearing a panthers jersey... and if we take a look up in the box Ivan Cleary is not sitting there as coach. They are completely different and I don't think they can provide a defence to overturn it."
Click to expand...

Did he actually say this?
 
Sproj said:
Did he actually say this?
Click to expand...
I was channeling him deeply and think I've nailed the first two sentences... where he goes with defending the two depends, but I decided to cut through the cryptic wording and get straight to the facts
 
Meaney on the wing is interesting. Maybe I've just not seen the talk of it but wasn't expecting that.
 
Kalani Going looked so good for the Warriors cup team in some of the finals I watched. See he is already in the Panthers 17 for this week. Another one they will turn into a regular solid first grader. They know when to pounce on these guys. Pun intended.
 
New Posts

Unread

Back
Top