POST GAME [Round 19, 2022] Broncos vs Eels

There needs to be a royal commission into what happened down Pereira's side last night. It probably wasn't all his fault. In case anyone missed it, Jordan Riki went off injured (hamstring, possibly) in the 50th minute, yet still topped the tackle count. Have a look at these numbers for the left and right. It's clear they targeted his side.

Oates was lauded for his defence last night, but he didn't have anywhere near the workload. I suspect Riki going off upset the apple cart and threw the structure out of whack.

Tackles, Missed, Ineffective

Niu: 6, 0, 0

Pereira: 11, 2, 2
Staggs: 20, 2, 3
Riki (50 minutes): 31, 1, 0

Oates: 4, 1, 2
Lee: 11, 1, 1
Capewell: 26, 6, 4

Turpin (40 minutes): 21, 1, 1
Paix (40 minutes): 21, 1, 5

Carrigan (60 minutes): 31, 3, 0
Haas (60 minutes): 29, 2, 1
Flegler (52 minutes): 21, 1, 3

3 man over lap to the Eels with 12 players on the field !!??
WTF ? Boys didn`t communicate like they needed to .
 
It always amazes me how we could beat a side by 50 & all the talk is about some innocuous call that went against the other team. Yet, If we’re on the end of it you don’t hear about it again.
 
If we are talking getting a second rower in instead of Palasia which I agree with, we should go Gamble. The guy makes the team better, it is obvious for all to see AND he defends on the edge as a half anyway. His size also makes him not a liability there either. He adds another dimension in attack as well.
 
Flegs is going to be dangerous once his offloads find the man. He throws them in Webcke like positions.
 
Also on the Reynolds obstruction, I haven't watched any replays but from memory he doesn't move in order to "initiate" the contact, which would make it play on. He is literally standing there as 2 people run towards him and holds his ground, then gets bowled over by the decoy. Where the ball is at that point (inside, outside) is irrelevant, you can't take out defenders at any stage. But add to the fact that was pointed out earlier, and that's that Reynolds being down forces the next defender to not be able to slide (as they have to cover the gap left) and you 100% have am obstruction situation. It's mind blowing that people are whingeing about it, but is anyone surprised? Any mention of the Eels getting the massively lop-sided penalty count where they were pretty much handed field position on every exit set in the second half?
 
Also on the Reynolds obstruction, I haven't watched any replays but from memory he doesn't move in order to "initiate" the contact, which would make it play on. He is literally standing there as 2 people run towards him and holds his ground, then gets bowled over by the decoy. Where the ball is at that point (inside, outside) is irrelevant, you can't take out defenders at any stage. But add to the fact that was pointed out earlier, and that's that Reynolds being down forces the next defender to not be able to slide (as they have to cover the gap left) and you 100% have am obstruction situation. It's mind blowing that people are whingeing about it, but is anyone surprised? Any mention of the Eels getting the massively lop-sided penalty count where they were pretty much handed field position on every exit set in the second half?

Yeah but NSW lost and Broncos are mean and stuff so you know, reasons.

This is where the video ref should be praised for getting it right.
 
Jordan Pereri’s stuff up with the foot into touch needs to be explained ad nauseam to our backs.

So long as your foot is planted over the line you need only touch the ball. There is no need to concentrate on securely catching it.

So - plant foot, and simply touch ball.
 
I'm actually surprised they awarded this one.

Any other time, that would have been ruled a knock on by Kotoni. He's making a tackle, but even when making a tackle generally if you touch it and it goes forward, it's called a knock on. I've never heard of a ruling that says it's not a knock on if you score a try from it.

 
I'm actually surprised they awarded this one.

Any other time, that would have been ruled a knock on by Kotoni. He's making a tackle, but even when making a tackle generally if you touch it and it goes forward, it's called a knock on. I've never heard of a ruling that says it's not a knock on if you score a try from it.



Think he has to play at the ball, think they said it was considered a loose carry because he didn't play at it.
 
I'm actually surprised they awarded this one.

Any other time, that would have been ruled a knock on by Kotoni. He's making a tackle, but even when making a tackle generally if you touch it and it goes forward, it's called a knock on. I've never heard of a ruling that says it's not a knock on if you score a try from it.


Actually they normally call a double knock on don’t they? And we would have got the feed.
 
If we are talking getting a second rower in instead of Palasia which I agree with, we should go Gamble. The guy makes the team better, it is obvious for all to see AND he defends on the edge as a half anyway. His size also makes him not a liability there either. He adds another dimension in attack as well.

I like your argument .
He did look absolutely gassed when he came off last week though . Anaerobic and aerobic fitness balance can be an interesting juggle .
I believe Tyson used a lot more grunt last week because he played as a middle and ran the ball more than he usually does . Wore him out more .
I'm actually surprised they awarded this one.

Any other time, that would have been ruled a knock on by Kotoni. He's making a tackle, but even when making a tackle generally if you touch it and it goes forward, it's called a knock on. I've never heard of a ruling that says it's not a knock on if you score a try from it.



Usually the knock on call comes when the ball carrier is passing and gets tackled .
Gutherson just didn`t hold the ball tight enough . Kotono hit it ,but last contact was by Gutherson . Play on .

Oh @McHunt the Broncos were penalised last night for obstructing the kick chase .
Your pet the last cpl of weeks .
No one is talking about that but ?
 
This may seem petty but something that annoys me is that no matter how good he plays and becomes he will likely play less origins than he should purely due to timing.
Deardens performance in origin means he will get 1st shot for next 5 years despite his form and ongoing performances, unless absolutely atrocious. A blind dog could tell you mam has literally twice the talent and ability of him than dearden but if slater took over origin next year instead of this year mam would be a qld player for the next 15 years without question.
This annoys me because it limits his ability to grow from rep footy even further, and play those big games.
He will get a shot at some stage, but no doubt it will be pressure loaded and he'd need to be MoM to even be considered for another game with no chance to grow. Just like it happens to every broncos player...
Dearden will fall off outside of the cows when he inevitable gets an insane salary from a struggling club in a couple of years. There is no chance on gods green earth I’d want Tom doing anything more than supporting a game managing half; I struggle to see how he will ever be a dominant half.
 

Active Now

  • Brotherdu
  • broncsgoat
  • Tim K
  • bb_gun
  • Mr Fourex
  • Waynesaurus
  • Tmac
  • Matheos
  • Xzei
  • barker
  • Hoof Hearted
  • Bucking Beads
  • BrentTatesChin
  • Harry Sack
  • Sproj
  • Broncosgirl
  • Jedhead
... and 5 more.
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.