NRL 2026 Round 7 Discussion

So is the falling over after you play it now dead?

I thought Tago ****ed it by falling over at the end.

Also saw someone fall over after playing it either last night or last round... they were automatic errors for not having control or something last year
 
BroncsFan said:
So is the falling over after you play it now dead?

I thought Tago ****ed it by falling over at the end.

Also saw someone fall over after playing it either last night or last round... they were automatic errors for not having control or something last year
Click to expand...
Yeah he 100% lost his feet. But I think phins were crowding/all over him in the ruck so I think they let it slide to avoid having to give panthers a penalty to ruin the spectacle. I could be wrong - would have to watch the replay.
 
I would have liked to see the Edwards/Gilbert contest again but nah its okay
 
Brocko said:
I would have liked to see the Edwards/Gilbert contest again but nah its okay
Click to expand...
I thought Gilbert touched it tbh. Looked like it deflected a touch. Maybe if it was the opposite call it would not have been overturned also. Gilbert didnt blow up I dont think. Might not have had the energy the way he was looking lol
 
BroncsFan said:
So is the falling over after you play it now dead?

I thought Tago ****ed it by falling over at the end.

Also saw someone fall over after playing it either last night or last round... they were automatic errors for not having control or something last year
Click to expand...
Had to be a penalty one way or another.

50/50 call. Tabuai-Fidow holds onto the ankle of Tago, but Tago ball-plants which usually nullifies any ruck interference.

I missed that live, I thought Tago may have been tackled during his half-break but there's clearly no contact when he falls on the ground.
 
JayPee said:
I thought Gilbert touched it tbh. Looked like it deflected a touch. Maybe if it was the opposite call it would not have been overturned also. Gilbert didnt blow up I dont think. Might not have had the energy the way he was looking lol
Click to expand...
Still just wish they'd call it either way rather than hiding behind inconclusive
 
Brocko said:
7 tackle sets on field goal attempts are kinda ass too NGL
Click to expand...
I don't mind it... golden point is already a shootout having the 7 tackle set at least prevents them from just spraying shots from at the end of every set
 
JayPee said:
I thought Gilbert touched it tbh. Looked like it deflected a touch. Maybe if it was the opposite call it would not have been overturned also. Gilbert didnt blow up I dont think. Might not have had the energy the way he was looking lol
Click to expand...
I thought he probably did too... his hands were above Edwards so he's touching it first if it touches anything before it gets to Edwards.
 
BroncsFan said:
I don't mind it... golden point is already a shootout having the 7 tackle set at least prevents them from just spraying shots from at the end of every set
Click to expand...
Just seems like such a huge benefit which maybe stops teams from trying the field goal at times. It guaranteed Penrith would be in shooting range after Katoa missed.
 
Brocko said:
Still just wish they'd call it either way rather than hiding behind inconclusive
Click to expand...
They have to keep the inconclusive, because a captain doesn't know if video footage is available before they send up the challenge.

If Gilbert potentially doesn't touch it, but there's no footage then they've lost their challenge even if it was successful.

The bullshit ones are when there's clear footage, but the bunker is too gutless to take the challenge off the team because a game is getting tight... so they just chuck out a 'after reviewing all angles we're sticking with the onfield'... even though we can clearly see a ****ing angle for the bunker to make a decision on... they just don't want to
 
I just hate the process of keeping challenges.

It should be there to either eliminate absolute clangers or arrive to the right decision where it'd be virtually impossible to call it live.

I don't think you could definitively say Gilbert didn't touch the ball, therefore you lose your challenge.
 
BroncsFan said:
They have to keep the inconclusive, because a captain doesn't know if video footage is available before they send up the challenge.

If Gilbert potentially doesn't touch it, but there's no footage then they've lost their challenge even if it was successful.

The bullshit ones are when there's clear footage, but the bunker is too gutless to take the challenge off the team because a game is getting tight... so they just chuck out a 'after reviewing all angles we're sticking with the onfield'
Click to expand...
Oh im not saying get rid of it completely as like you say it has a need. If there is no clear footage, keep it, thats fine.

But like the storm one earlier and this one we're talking about, you could make a call. They just didn't want to
 
Brocko said:
Just seems like such a huge benefit which maybe stops teams from trying the field goal at times. It guaranteed Penrith would be in shooting range after Katoa missed.
Click to expand...
It is a huge benefit, but that's the risk with taking a shot when you're not in the correct position.

It can force teams to run it or do something else with it instead of just spraying a crap field goal attempt from 45m out though.

The worst part of golden point is that it turns into a crap shootout... we don't need to incentivise more crap shots at goal
 
Brocko said:
Oh im not saying get rid of it completely as like you say it has a need. If there is no clear footage, keep it, thats fine.

But like the storm one earlier and this one we're talking about, you could make a call. They just didn't want to
Click to expand...
I'm in the court of getting rid of it completely... I'm ****ing done with challenging on 'foul play' because there's a finger tip on someone's chin.

The original rule prevented that from happening, but it's been dragged into it, because they review the entire play.

The original rules also prevented challenging discretional penalties as well, but even those are getting dragged into captain's challenges.

I don't think there's any saving the captain's challenge at this point.

The players know the rulebook better than the refs already, but it doesn't help that the ref is directed to manage games, so they put the whistle away, especially when it gets tight... but players know there's a rule broken somewhere on just about every play and they can exploit it with the captain's challenge creating massive changes in momentum at critical points in a game.

The ability to captain's challenge on missed field goal attempts is going to create a HUGE controversy at some point... the only thing holding it back at the moment is that games have been decided by 20pts on average and there's barely a need for field goals at the moment.
 
Big Pete said:
I just hate the process of keeping challenges.

It should be there to either eliminate absolute clangers or arrive to the right decision where it'd be virtually impossible to call it live.

I don't think you could definitively say Gilbert didn't touch the ball, therefore you lose your challenge.
Click to expand...
I'd be all for that, but you can already see a situation where a team gets it correct, but the bunker just gaslights it with a "nah too hard basket I'll go with the onfield" and then they lose their challenge (that already happens).

And then there would be the grub cunty teams that would continue to exploit the captain's challenge, whilst their opponent's are losing their challenges on 50/50 calls.

NRL teams are not smart enough in the heat of the moment to not throw their challenge away... look at manly last night.

Just take it off them altogether and force everyone to cop Belinda's howlers
 
New Posts

Unread

Back
Top