Origin 1
- Thread starter Browny
- Start date
No doubt tryhard, and Slater was excellent. Just pointing out that he did make a monumental **** up which was thankfully overruled by Harrigan in the box.
QUEENSLANDER and other members of the Slater cheer squad are incapable of recognising his faults.
QUEENSLANDER and other members of the Slater cheer squad are incapable of recognising his faults.
Coxy said:
I had emphasised this point before SOO when selections were announced. I believe his impact is great in a winning team, but he generally has nothing to offer.
Can't believe no one mention how great Ashley Harrison was. He did everything that was asked of him. Like Gould said, he is not a player like Price or Civo but he is outstanding in defense and attack, always proves to be a formidable selection and works great out wide. He tidied up so much for us.
Crocker looked like he never left, he was facing a lot of criticism from NSW but he showed why he is a top origin player.
Our kicks were outstanding particuarly from Smith and Thurston (Locky good too, but didn't do much in kick when there are two other great options), and led to great field position.
Why didn't Hunt come on as fullback with Slater moving to wing with Folau to centre (or vice versa)? I though that it would have been more obvious.
Campese did jack, which confirmed the opinion of Wayne Pearce. He does have the tendency to go missing. Wallace didn't do anything, maybe because Locky wasn't there. Their forwards were crap.
Qld need to watch complacency, but pretty much just tighten up general things. NSW's tries were complete arse and had a lot of luck go their way. Anyone remember that knock on against Inglis late in the second half? How did he knock on, the blue player knocked it out of his hands? Should have been a scrum to Qld.
Expect to see major changes, as we always do when NSW lose.
Just wanted to add that maybe the video ref looked at that Hayne no-try a million times because they're sick of having their arse raked over hot coals each time a contentious decision is made. Thankfully the right one has been made, as seen from Coxy's picture above.
Coxy said:
Yeah and he has done that same pass for Storm heaps of times and it has payed off. Had this one he would have been a hero.It didn't work for him so he is a villian. [eusa_naugh Get real. The guy is a brilliant and passionate athlete
Your photo reminds me so much of Bellamy and his press conference btw. [icon_lol1. The guy is a total jerk and thank God he did not come to our club as so many wanted at the time
- Mar 5, 2008
- 30,392
- 19,413
Coxy said:
Just to make it even more obvious for our legally blind posters....
It's not even close, his foot is blatantly out.
Bellamy is a joke, can't believe he is whinging over this.
tryhard said:
:roll: Where have I said he's not a good player? All I've said he's capable of brain explosions that can potentially cost his teams a lot.
Seriously, some people here are just blinded by their love of certain players. Like my opinion that Thurston's not a halfback. I still stand by that. Yet, people think that means I'm saying he's a shit player? LOL.
Last night he didn't play like a halfback. Lockyer did. Thurston was able to do what he's best at and he was great. You always know what you're going to get from Thurston and he does it well.
Result was that Lockyer was quiet and is being criticised by some as not having an impact. But that's because he had to do the halfback's job. If Prince was there instead of Thurston it would've been reverse roles. Locky would've been the dominant individual while Prince did all the organising.
But no doubt you'll all read that now and say I'm calling Thurston shit. :roll:
ningnangnong said:Coxy said:
Just to make it even more obvious for our legally blind posters....
It's not even close, his foot is blatantly out.
Bellamy is a joke, can't believe he is whinging over this.
But can you really tell? I mean, it looks like his foot is on the line, but can you be completely, 100%, not just 99.999999%, certain, that his heel wasn't in the air and part of his boot was actually in contact with a blade of grass? Benefit of the doubt surely?
[icon_lol1. [icon_razz1 [icon_lol1. [icon_razz1 [icon_lol1. [icon_razz1 [icon_lol1. [icon_razz1 [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1.
OXY-351
NRL Player
- Oct 1, 2008
- 2,185
- 923
Coxy said:
Just to make it even more obvious for our legally blind posters....
I actually think there is some doubt as to whether or not the part of his boot near the line is actually grounded on the line or fractionally in the air. To be honest, I would have been happy for it to go either way, but probably learn towards a benfit of the doubt.
I actually agree with Bellamy when he said that the fact the video refs had so many looks at it, it mustn't have been clear cut either way, so benefit of the doubt should have been applied to the attacking team.
What I would have been most happy with though was for the video refs to send it back as a refs call and let the touchy rule on it. He should have had the best view out of anyone. Touchies seem even more reluctant to make decisions than the refs
Coxy said:
Lol. Like you can talk about misconstruing others posts. You are the king of it on here
Unread
-
-
-
The one thing Michael Maguire won’t do after dominant Broncos win- Latest: Mick_Hancock
-
