POST GAME [Round 18, 2022] Broncos vs Titans

[Organix]

Remembering that this one among many others has been given a try

Dearden stopped short and tackled, ball arm clearly grounded well short and a deliberate second movement of the arm to promote the ball to the ingoal... but that's all good apparently

Yeah, this one sucks. The difference is that he doesn't stretch the arm out, so it's not as apparent as to whether he promoted it or it was the impact/momentum from the tackles. Hosking was definitely hard done by, but his made it more cut and dry than the Tammy Dondon one.

I remember there was a Broncos try disallowed because Pangai's arm in the offload scraped the ground. It was pretty much the exact same situation, the pass was in motion before the tackle was over, per se, but in some cases things need to be arbitrarily assigned, or else we dig deeper into the chaos that is the NRL grey zone.

 

[Organix]

What we could be questioning is why at around 15 min. Kobe was called offside from a kick that Brimson dropped into Ezra 10m out? Even though Kobe was just within the 10, was backing up and not participating in the contest, was run onside by Reynolds and still had nothing to do with the contest following that. It led to a penalty, Titans march up the field, force 2 Broncos dropouts, complete momentum change and far more early defense for the Broncos in a game where this is huge at the end of the game.

That was similarly as unfair, nitpicky and game altering as a the Hosking double movement. It's technically correct, but probably happens 20 times a game and is only called once...against Broncos.

 

[Huge]

He literally gave it away moments from coming on the field on the weekend. Luckily for him, not all flops are penalized. He does fall onto tackles after the tackle is made often Huge, actually watching games instead of reading stats shows that.

Oh, so when you're wrong you just blunder on without apology? That is so incredibly weak.

Cowardly actually. What you mean to say is RK is able to slow the ptb down ( you know, Broncos advantage) and NOT get penalised and he does this a lot, right?

So you’re really saying it's fantastic that RK gets us an advantage but doesn't concede penalties, right?

As you now know RK hasn't conceded penalties ( plural/ multiple) but just the one so you'll retract that statement, yes?

Thanks for the ongoing opportunities to highlight the FACTS and stats. Keep lying and being dishonest, gives me openings.

 

[Mustafur]

What we could be questioning is why at around 15 min. Kobe was called offside from a kick that Brimson dropped into Ezra 10m out? Even though Kobe was just within the 10, was backing up and not participating in the contest, was run onside by Reynolds and still had nothing to do with the contest following that. It led to a penalty, Titans march up the field, force 2 Broncos dropouts, complete momentum change and far more early defense for the Broncos in a game where this is huge at the end of the game.

That was similarly as unfair, nitpicky and game altering as a the Hosking double movement. It's technically correct, but probably happens 20 times a game and is only called once...against Broncos.

As far as I know the rule is within 10 meters regardless of in the contest or not, the logic being them just being there can influence a catch or an attacking movement off an offside player.

That said if the kicker brings them back onside by running ahead before it happens they are onside no matter what happens thereafter.

 

[Cult]

Oh, so when you're wrong you just blunder on without apology? That is so incredibly weak.

Cowardly actually. What you mean to say is RK is able to slow the ptb down ( you know, Broncos advantage) and NOT get penalised and he does this a lot, right?

So you’re really saying it's fantastic that RK gets us an advantage but doesn't concede penalties, right?

As you now know RK hasn't conceded penalties ( plural/ multiple) but just the one so you'll retract that statement, yes?

Thanks for the ongoing opportunities to highlight the FACTS and stats. Keep lying and being dishonest, gives me openings.

Neither did Nathan Hindmarsh genius. Still king of flops

 

[Broncos Maestro]

That was similarly as unfair, nitpicky and game altering as a the Hosking double movement. It's technically correct, but probably happens 20 times a game and is only called ...against Broncos.

Fixed for accuracy (removed the once).

 

[Midean]

Im stoked with this win.

2 seasons ago that would have been a 50 point flogging against us and a nail in the coffin of the season.
Jeez we have come a long way since the dark days of Seibold.

 

[Sproj]

Surprisingly not being held isn't relevant. Once you ground, you can't make another effort to ground, unless your body is already moving forward. It's strictly about momentum.

Annesley explains exactly that here:

Double-movement rule is tilting at windmills: NRL is better without it

In rugby league, as in life, everybody has a beef about something. Could be flat passes being called forward. Could be on-field referees who…

www.theroar.com.au

Love it! So once you hit the ground, if you are not held, you must remain there prone until someone comes and smashes you.

 

[Organix]

As far as I know the rule is within 10 meters regardless of in the contest or not, the logic being them just being there can influence a catch or an attacking movement off an offside player.

That said if the kicker brings them back onside by running ahead before it happens they are onside no matter what happens thereafter.

Yeah, that is how I understand it too. Obviously there is some level of discretion in refereeing that. In this case Hetherington trots a few steps forward, then begins retreating.
However, watching it again, Reynolds had run Hetherington onside just around the apex of the kick.
I think the referee just assumed Ezra must be offside because he was there so quickly, then just found some excuse for the penalty.
Ref said, "Kobe is within 10 before you put him on, mate". So, I don't really know if you just can't kick it into that zone at all. It was a short kick, and Kobe is like 5m away. The ball is still 10m in the air when Reynolds runs past Kobe.

 

[Sproj]

Remembering that this one among many others has been given a try

Dearden stopped short and tackled, ball arm clearly grounded well short and a deliberate second movement of the arm to promote the ball to the ingoal... but that's all good apparently

On this point and the Hosking call, I am not saying the no try wasn't harsh as others like it are sometimes given but this is the problem with the NRL in general, no consistency. The call for the Hosking no try IS the right one, he did a textbook double movement, intent does not matter. This should be the case no matter what happens once the ball hits the ground while you are held under the current rules. The issue is when the idiot video refs decide to see things no one else sees and bring in different interpretations. The rule should be an absolute no brainer to implement. You move the arm after it touches the ground in an extending motion, regardless of intent and it isn't because of momentum, you are done, no try.

 

[McHunt]

Love it! So once you hit the ground, if you are not held, you must remain there prone until someone comes and smashes you.

You couldn't make up these rules.

 

[Organix]

The question is, what is the distance allowed? Is it immediate from the kick, because a lot of grubbers or kicks into the in-goal would breach that, I think.

 

[Mustafur]

View attachment 19218

The question is, what is the distance allowed? Is it immediate from the kick, because a lot of grubbers or kicks into the in-goal would breach that, I think.

I'm a bit confused on the interpretation of it given what happened, because him being within 10 at any point would be a problem for the defender he should never of been in and even with the kicker playing them onside it could effect their play, but I'm almost certain under the rules if the kicker plays you on before the catch your onside.

Anyone have the rule for this?

 

[Foordy]

As far as I know the rule is within 10 meters regardless of in the contest or not, the logic being them just being there can influence a catch or an attacking movement off an offside player.

That said if the kicker brings them back onside by running ahead before it happens they are onside no matter what happens thereafter.

I don't know if it was ever officially changed ... but for the last several years, it has been ruled that they had to be active in the play to be ruled off side. they've sort of moved to the passive off side rule that soccer has.

 

[Dash]

I don't know if it was ever officially changed ... but for the last several years, it has been ruled that they had to be active in the play to be ruled off side. they've sort of moved to the passive off side rule that soccer has.

That's right, but being "run onside" negates the need to remain passive. It was 100% the wrong call either way.

 

[Big Pete]

I believe the interpretation is that if a player is within the 10m from the kick and where the ball lands they cannot be run onside by their kicker.

It was a bail out penalty. Had Brimson taken the kick and been tackled by anyone other than Kobe it would have been play-on. However since he made a mistake it was deemed that the course of the game had changed while a player was offside.

It's a tough one because you see players off-side and within the 10 when a try is scored only to be ruled as passive.

 

[BroncsFan]

I've just seen the Hosking one again and half his body ends up in the ingoal so he had momentum regardless of whether the ball touched the ground anyway... so any promotion of the ball doesn't come into it anyway

 

[LittleDavey]

One of two things will happen, he will lose his mind sighting he needs to go back to Sydney or he will be injured most of the time.

It's crazy how when he left Manly the first time he spent most of it on the sidelines then when he comes back suddenly he works again and there is no issues.

Reminiscent of Bird for us, too. Yuk. At least Foran is a key player in a position they need help in, where Bird was purely a luxury signing. A very expensive one at that.