POST GAME Round 21 - Cowboys vs Broncos

[Jedhead]

I dont actually mind the cowboys ground staff modifying the ground to suit their team/strategy. I am surprised that this strategy is not more commonly used. It would really bring that old school home ground advantage into play. If it is not considered dangerous, is it against the rules?

I consider it very dangerous if the away team are expecting the conditions to mirror the climate. Apart from that it robs the spectators of a proper fast and free-flowing game.

If your thing is slog-fests you're welcome to it.

 

[lynx000]

Matty has also worked with pretty much every other half in the comp, including Ash Taylor. I’d take joeys footy brain over Mattys any day of the week.

As I posted earlier, the man you want on retainer is Cooper Cronk. Fly him up here during the off-season and put him up overnight, let him have two sessions a week with all of the halves, or more if he thinks it is needed. Fly him up and back the same day if necessary.

 

[BroncsFan]

As much as it looked like it touched his arm, we didn't see a view that clearly proved it. Even that still posted previously doesn't prove it. That's the issue with making the refs call try or no try.

I seriously hate the try no try call by the on field ref.

I would prefer a system where the on field ref and bunker actually talked with each other.

In this instance the on field ref could've said I had clear view and it didn't appear to contact the arm... or he can say I had no view of it and have no opinion on whether it touched him or not.

In that way the vid ref clearly knows what they should and should not be clearing up for the on field ref.

Again in this instance.. what if the ref actually sent it up to check whether Shiba was taken high???

 

[Dexter]

I'm pretty sure the onfield ref says things like check grounding or check if there was a touch or check everything

 

[pagey]

I dont actually mind the cowboys ground staff modifying the ground to suit their team/strategy. I am surprised that this strategy is not more commonly used. It would really bring that old school home ground advantage into play. If it is not considered dangerous, is it against the rules?

It's ridiculous, who wants to watch wet sloppy footy. Fast, dry track is what people want.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

I seriously hate the try no try call by the on field ref.

I would prefer a system where the on field ref and bunker actually talked with each other.

In this instance the on field ref could've said I had clear view and it didn't appear to contact the arm... or he can say I had no view of it and have no opinion on whether it touched him or not.

In that way the vid ref clearly knows what they should and should not be clearing up for the on field ref.

Again in this instance.. what if the ref actually sent it up to check whether Shiba was taken high???

So what happens if the ref says, “I’ve go no idea if it touched the ground” and the video doesn’t show it either? Try or No Try?

 

[Jedhead]

So what happens if the ref says, “I’ve go no idea if it touched the ground” and the video doesn’t show it either? Try or No Try?

It's whatever the ref sent it up as. They must make that decision (and often they have no clue) when sending it to the bunker. Either making a 'T' with their arms or an 'x' across their chest.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

It's whatever the ref sent it up as. They must make that decision (and often they have no clue) when sending it to the bunker. Either making a 'T' with their arms or an 'x' across their chest.

Sorry mate, am I missing something? Isn’t that what happens now?

 

[Culhwch]

So what happens if the ref says, “I’ve go no idea if it touched the ground” and the video doesn’t show it either? Try or No Try?

Wasn't it benefit of the doubt to the attacking team at one point? Or am I dreaming that?

 

[johnyE]

That was a pathetic performance but happy to beat the Cowgirls like that.

We were seriously disgraceful.

Yes Dee we win ugly , but the promise of these young forwards does excite me a little and gives me hope . Johns comments about no halves involvement ,no backing up supporting the ball carrier , standing flat ,is where Siebs needs to work on . Some 1/2s and 3/4 's would be nice to get a good running game going as well , but the standing around in a bunch with no apparent idea of what happens next which Joey eluded to , is about training that into them . A very talented roster ,very underdone . Turpin led by example at the death ,effort on effort , I only wish it was against Melbourne , but the Cowgirls at home was sweet.

 

[Jedhead]

Sorry mate, am I missing something? Isn’t that what happens now?

Exactly. He might say he has no clue but he still has to send it up as either a try or no try so your scenario would never eventuate.

 

[I bleed Maroon]

Darius Boyd's stunning stats from last night.

80 minutes.
1 run
1 run metre
2 missed tackles
14 kick metres

I dunno if I can take much more of this shit. This is embarrassing to the club to have the captain dishing up this sort of trash and yet seems to be completely impervious to any action by the coaching staff whatsoever. One player seems to have a gun to the head of the whole club. Drop his fucking ass.

 

[NSW stables]

It's ridiculous, who wants to watch wet sloppy footy. Fast, dry track is what people want.

Not necessarily drenching the field but tailoring to your teams game plan. I mean if any surface modification helped us beat the storm i would consider it.

Personally, yeah, i prefer a dry track, but if it was in your teams best interest and you needed the win, i can see why someone would

 

[BroncsFan]

So what happens if the ref says, “I’ve go no idea if it touched the ground” and the video doesn’t show it either? Try or No Try?

But he would though... the ball is either on the ground or not by the time they blow the whistle.

So he would say I've got vision of the ball on the ground but check he's maintained it through to grounding.

OR

I've got the ball held up check if he's grounded that beforehand.

In last night's game I'm guessing he would've said check how it comes out and check he controls it through to grounding but I've got a try.

What happens
- Clifford has a hand on the ball which could constitute playing at it when it comes loose
- Shiba gets taken slightly high
- Wright juggles it and multiple camera angles show it potentially touches Opacic who's in front of him (accidental offside)

Gets sent up as a try they give it if it gets sent up as no try they don't give it.

There's so many times when they just blindly take the on field ref because he has to call try or no try.

The dragons last week got one when Widdop clearly knocked it on contesting the ball, but it was sent up a try so the bunker scrambles to come up with some ridiculous excuse to agree with the on field ref.

Even in origin McGuire's try was a massive double movement, but given a try on field we'll give it a try then.

The bunker only seems to overrule when it's absolutely blatant (Turps last night) or sometimes it appears to happen in order to keep the game tight (Maumalo being denied an obvious try a few weeks back as warriors starting running away with it)

 

[ivanhungryjak]

I am 100% sure that at some stage since the introduction of the video ref and then the rule that he has to make an on field call, the ref hasn’t had a clue whether a ball has touched the ground or not but has had to guess because he has to make a call.

 

[winslow_wong]

I dunno if I can take much more of this shit. This is embarrassing to the club to have the captain dishing up this sort of trash and yet seems to be completely impervious to any action by the coaching staff whatsoever. One player seems to have a gun to the head of the whole club. Drop his fucking ass.

Was his one run out from dummy half as well? Makes it all the more pathetic

 

[Wolfie]

But he would though... the ball is either on the ground or not by the time they blow the whistle.

So he would say I've got vision of the ball on the ground but check he's maintained it through to grounding.

OR

I've got the ball held up check if he's grounded that beforehand.

In last night's game I'm guessing he would've said check how it comes out and check he controls it through to grounding but I've got a try.

What happens
- Clifford has a hand on the ball which could constitute playing at it when it comes loose
- Shiba gets taken slightly high
- Wright juggles it and multiple camera angles show it potentially touches Opacic who's in front of him (accidental offside)

Gets sent up as a try they give it if it gets sent up as no try they don't give it.

There's so many times when they just blindly take the on field ref because he has to call try or no try.

The dragons last week got one when Widdop clearly knocked it on contesting the ball, but it was sent up a try so the bunker scrambles to come up with some ridiculous excuse to agree with the on field ref.

Even in origin McGuire's try was a massive double movement, but given a try on field we'll give it a try then.

The bunker only seems to overrule when it's absolutely blatant (Turps last night) or sometimes it appears to happen in order to keep the game tight (Maumalo being denied an obvious try a few weeks back as warriors starting running away with it)

Just scrap the video ref. We still get plenty of errors with one, so lets just live with human error from the on field refs and get on with it.

 

[pagey]

Not necessarily drenching the field but tailoring to your teams game plan. I mean if any surface modification helped us beat the storm i would consider it.

Personally, yeah, i prefer a dry track, but if it was in your teams best interest and you needed the win, i can see why someone would

I know what you're saying but it would just even out when you play away games. At least if you have the best conditions you get the best chance to watch exciting games, and the better team wins.