POST GAME [Round 12, 2023] Broncos vs Panthers

[BroncsFan]

I think it's 50 mins for Capewell where he still fully effective, Penrith game shows that, saved a Crichton try at the 49th min that we blew with the middle not moving the line over after.

if your benching an edge a bit after the 2nd half starts will get the most out of the freshness advantage from what I can see.

A tactic being used at the moment is getting 60mins or so out of your second rowers.

Payten did it last year with Leilua, Cleary did it with Kiks in 2021 and Martin at times (was also doing it with Capewell), Bennett did it with Lemuelu at the start of this year, etc.

If you have a second rower that you can use somewhere else throughout the game, then you can utilise those bench spots by keeping players fresh.

Payten started Gilbert at 11 last year and then rotated him into the middle... Cleary often shifts his second rowers from one side to the other (effectively using 3 second rowers for 2 spots), Bennett has been putting Kenny Brom into the middle rotation to accommodate Lemuelu.

If Piakura is going to be anything then getting him into the team to play 40-50mins and then moving Capewell into lock later in the game could be an option to start integrating him into the team.

 

[Mustafur]

A tactic being used at the moment is getting 60mins or so out of your second rowers.

Payten did it last year with Leilua, Cleary did it with Kiks in 2021 and Martin at times (was also doing it with Capewell), Bennett did it with Lemuelu at the start of this year, etc.

If you have a second rower that you can use somewhere else throughout the game, then you can utilise those bench spots by keeping players fresh.

Payten started Gilbert at 11 last year and then rotated him into the middle... Cleary often shifts his second rowers from one side to the other (effectively using 3 second rowers for 2 spots), Bennett has been putting Kenny Brom into the middle rotation to accommodate Lemuelu.

If Piakura is going to be anything then getting him into the team to play 40-50mins and then moving Capewell into lock later in the game could be an option to start integrating him into the team.

Gilbert definitely has lot more stamina than Capewell to do more mins, but he misses tonnes of tackles as well, idk what cap situation Cowboys were dealing with but having Leilua is a very high level backrower to have as a bench option, he was a starter at both his previous teams.

It's hard for me to judge Piakura because he hasn't played enough first grade for me to judge where he is at, given he is a top 30 player he should have played more than he has by now.

We would be in alot better position if Kobe was comfortable at edge as well as Lock, teams like Parra who have Matterson and Cartwright who can play lock and back row at a good level helps them use Hopgood for what he is best at, we just don't have that.

The 17th man we need is ideally that backrow and 13 option.

 

[Sproj]

Given player 17 is currently getting about 10 minutes a game regardless, it should be Piakura. We don’t need three middles on the bench when Kevvie plays Patty and Payne for about 60 minutes anyway.

 

[Mustafur]

 

[Painin the Haas]

I’m going against the trend and say I was pleased about how we went tonight, sure I’m disappointed we lost but we played the full 80 just got outplayed by a brilliant team who nailed their game plan.

Sure we missed chances and made mistakes but we played a full game especially in defence. They could have ran away with it but if anything our defence got better as it went on.

This is where this team is right now, against average defence and with momentum we win and win well but get into a grind with the best we are eventually outplayed.

compounding errors is my only gripe, we keep making mistakes followed by an immediate penalty which lead to points and we just can’t keep doing that

 

[Fitzy]

You are right by saying the better team won but to say we were bang average I don't know what game you were watching.

What game were you watching to think we played well. We missed 48 tackles, made 10 unforced errors, executed poorly, couldn’t get out of our own end and we had dreadful end of sets. It’s good and well to say hey we kept the score low - which I’m so massively proud about - but that’s the only area we measured up tonight. Nowhere else as a unit was good enough. That was a 40-0 domination in which our goal line defence kept it to 15-4. That in itself was incredible and I can’t be more proud but outside of that we were near shithouse, we really were. No, if buts or maybes there isn’t a single area of our game outside of that you would argue was any better than average. So really yes it is a bang average overall performance. We were never in it and whilst I’d love to keep the energy positive on the defence there was a number of really shit efforts defensively as well. There were equally as many shit defensive efforts from players as good ones it’s just the good ones stopped the shit efforts from being detrimental to the scoreboard. I do have really high expectations and I don’t always expect other people to quite be as harsh a critic as I am, I completely get that but tonight was not a good performance. The very fact we were so far out of the game with even an all time defensive performance speaks volumes by how poor we were. Cause I can tell you despite being Reynolds and Oates short there isn’t that big a difference between us as every stat line to this game would suggest. Great defensive effort, very average game from the broncos though I’m afraid.

 

[Mustafur]

I’m going against the trend and say I was pleased about how we went tonight, sure I’m disappointed we lost but we played the full 80 just got outplayed by a brilliant team who nailed their game plan.

Sure we missed chances and made mistakes but we played a full game especially in defence. They could have ran away with it but if anything our defence got better as it went on.

This is where this team is right now, against average defence and with momentum we win and win well but get into a grind with the best we are eventually outplayed.

compounding errors is my only gripe, we keep making mistakes followed by an immediate penalty which lead to points and we just can’t keep doing that

Sometimes you just need to take a step back and look who we are playing against, our recent loses have all been to strong teams, and Penrith have the best defence in the competition by miles and we saw it.

Just look at the ladder and at Penrith's against, barely any points compared to everyone else, I think we would have them if we had Reyno, but it's good signs that we show this much ticker without the ideal team and no ball.

If this result was against the Dragons it would be a completely different story.

 

[I bleed Maroon]

Re: the double movement, that has been ruled as such for the past 10 years, and now all of a sudden the refs are giving the attacking side far more leeway when it comes to momentum and the whole thing with promoting the ball is suddenly far more liberal.

That is exactly what's wrong with the NRL. They're so fucking schizophrenic about the interpretation of rules and everyone is fucking sick of it.

 

[Mustafur]

Re: the double movement, that has been ruled as such for the past 10 years, and now all of a sudden the refs are giving the attacking side far more leeway when it comes to momentum and the whole thing with promoting the ball is suddenly far more liberal.

That is exactly what's wrong with the NRL. They're so fucking schizophrenic about the interpretation of rules and everyone is fucking sick of it.

I think they reclarified it in the last few years, double movement is fine only if they think momentum would have the ball over the line regardless.

in this case though I don't think it qualifies.

 

[McHunt]

I think they reclarified it in the last few years, double movement is fine only if they think momentum would have the ball over the line regardless.

in this case though I don't think it qualifies.

I'm fine with that try being allowed and would be pissed off if we had one like that ruled a double-movement. In my head a double-movement involves you inch-worming your body forward after you've grounded rather than merely lifting the ball and then placing it down again.

Over-ruling the bunker, on the other hand, is absolutely not on. I'm all for the official decision being final - regardless whether it might be "wrong" - but that also applies to the referee, who is overruled by the bunker in the official chain of command. The ref's opinion is fine - and probably correct - but it doesn't matter once the bunker has ruled. That was some weird shit. The bunker should've rejected his call.

 

[Mustafur]

I'm fine with that try being allowed and would be pissed off we had one like that ruled a double-movement.

Over-ruling the bunker, on the other hand, is not on. I'm all for the official decision being final - regardless whether it might be "wrong" - but that also applies to the referee, who is overruled by the bunker in the official chain of command. The ref's opinion is fine - and probably correct - but it doesn't matter once the bunker has ruled. That was some weird shit.

I agree with you on the second point and on first look I thought the double movement try was a 50/50 and okay with it awarded but watch the highlights on NRL youtube again, look where the ball is before he promotes it, you can't tell me that part of his jersey(in line with the bottom of his jersey number on the back) is over the line, it just isn't, he only just made the line with the promotion.

I understand the bunker has limited time to look at it because of the pressure on them but I think it just isn't a try.

I hope this ref interfering with the bunker is something that happens more often to stay consistent because if it's only in this game that is total bullshit, that has never happened before(not since 1997 Super League when it was first seen as a video ref and then later as the bunker).

 

[McHunt]

I agree with you on the second point and on first look I thought the double movement try was a 50/50 and okay with it awarded but watch the highlights on NRL youtube again, look where the ball is before he promotes it, you can't tell me that part of his jersey(in line with the bottom of his jersey number on the back) is over the line, it just isn't, he only just made the line with the promotion.

I understand the bunker has limited time to look at it because of the pressure on them but I think it just isn't a try.

I hope this ref interfering with the bunker is something that happens more often to stay consistent because if it's only in this game that is total bullshit, that has never happened before.

You're allowed to promote the ball, not your body. That's what constitutes the second movement and why inertia not movement is the key.

The biggest issue of the lot is that Luai wasn't binned for handling an official. Zero tolerance on that shit, no excuses. 10 minutes minimum. Sent off if it's deliberate.

 

[Mustafur]

You're allowed to promote the ball, not your body. That's what constitutes the second movement and why inertia is the key.

The biggest issue of the lot is that Luai wasn't binned for handling an official. Zero tolerance on that shit, no excuses. 10 minutes minimum. Sent off if it's deliberate.

I'm confused here then, I thought your allowed to promote the ball as long as the original location of the ball on your body is over.

NRL website says this:

• if the momentum of the player in possession carries him into the opponents in-goal area, it will not be a double movement if the ball would have finished over the goal line regardless of any subsequent movement of the ball or the arm carrying the ball.

That to me says only if the original location of ball is over.

I completely missed what Luai did, I guess I have to wait till full game replay later in the week.

 

[McHunt]

I'm confused here then, I thought your allowed to promote the ball as long as the original location of the ball on your body is over.

I completely missed what Luai did, I guess I have to wait till full game replay later in the week.

My understanding is if you're naturally travelling forward (what generally happens when you hit the deck running to the line) and you place the ball before the line, lift it again and place it over the line (without losing control of possession) it's a try. However, if you hit the deck come to a halt, and then inch your body forward to promote the ball that's a double movement.

It's difficult to comprehend because it's further confounded by the point at which the tackle is complete.

 

[Mustafur]

My understanding is if you're naturally travelling forward (what generally happens when you hit the deck running to the line) and you place the ball before the line, lift it again and place it over the line (without losing control of possession) it's a try. However, if you hit the deck come to a halt, and then inch your body forward to promote the ball that's a double movement.

It's difficult to comprehend because it's further confounded by the point at which the tackle is complete.

The rule does seem to link it to where in your body that ball was in line with when you grounded, he did infact ground it when his left shoulder was ahead of ball carry arm at the time, he then promoted it well beyond his left shoulder.

 

[McHunt]

The rule does seem to link it to where in your body that ball was in line with when you grounded, he did infact ground it when his left shoulder was ahead of ball carry arm at the time, he then promoted it well beyond his left shoulder.

As a lover of the game, I'd like to see that try awarded but on second look it's the movement of his left elbow in shifting his weight forward that might be controversial.

I'd prefer they erred on the side of attacker. Having a try disallowed because of a forensic double movement ruling is always pretty sucky. Even more so if it's us scoring it.

 

[Mustafur]

As a lover of the game, I'd like to see that try awarded but on second look it's the movement of his left elbow in shifting his weight forward that might be controversial.

I'd prefer they erred on the side of attacker. Having a try disallowed because of a forensic double movement ruling is always pretty sucky. Even more so if it's us scoring it.

fair enough, but the way I look at it he barely makes the line with the promotion which is why it's a hard call, more angles then what we can see are needed to be fully 100%.

 

[Organix]

Re: the double movement, that has been ruled as such for the past 10 years, and now all of a sudden the refs are giving the attacking side far more leeway when it comes to momentum and the whole thing with promoting the ball is suddenly far more liberal.

That is exactly what's wrong with the NRL. They're so fucking schizophrenic about the interpretation of rules and everyone is fucking sick of it.

It's the T20 effect. More scores means more excitement, means more viewers, means more money.