[Round 22, 2021] Broncos vs Roosters

[Renegade]

We pay Kennedy a pittance yet expect Haas like performance? No one can say Kennedy doesn't give value for money. It's fucking ludicrous to expect him to be a world class prop on basically McDonalds wages. He made one mistake that led to nothing.

he turned over possession in the dying minutes of a game wherein had we completed the set, we probably win. ball security should've been even more paramount in the wet.

 

[Huge]

I think it would be fair to say that on balance, Kennedy has been pretty great value this year.

Too fucking right. So sick of these dickheads who simply don't understand that you get what you pay for. They measure Kennedy on 120k against 500-800k props. I'd call Kennedy very ordinary if I was paying 700k for him. Paying 120k I think he's fabulous value.

 

[Sproj]

Oh yay, we are into this conversational part of the week.

Also, I don't care blames who other than Flegler should NOT be blamed for the high tackle for that penalty. He did absolutely nothing wrong, that penalty was a disgrace and I hope he holds his head high because he had a fantastic game.

 

[Huge]

he turned over possession in the dying minutes of a game wherein had we completed the set, we probably win. ball security should've been even more paramount in the wet.

So? Your point? Did you think he was not bothered? Why did the ball get passed? Why not simply ruck it up from dummy half for 5 slow ptbs and kick? Why throw a risky 10 metre pass?
So many if, buts, maybe's, would have should have could have. I'm sure Rhys knew ball security was paramount, Milford should have too.

 

[Huge]

Oh yay, we are into this conversational part of the week.

Also, I don't care blames who other than Flegler should NOT be blamed for the high tackle for that penalty. He did absolutely nothing wrong, that penalty was a disgrace and I hope he holds his head high because he had a fantastic game.

You really should look again at the tackle by Flegler. If he doesn't go high, we probably win, stone cold fact. Very poor but really, it's what we come to expect from the Bronco's head high King. He hit him in the head, 100% Flegler cost us the game.

 

[Renegade]

So? Your point? Did you think he was not bothered? Why did the ball get passed? Why not simply ruck it up from dummy half for 5 slow ptbs and kick? Why throw a risky 10 metre pass?
So many if, buts, maybe's, would have should have could have. I'm sure Rhys knew ball security was paramount, Milford should have too.

I don't really care what Kennedy thought when he dropped it, the fact remains despite your whataboutism, that Kennedy failed to secure the ball in a simple hit up in our own end with limited time on the clock. His dropped ball allowed them to attack which ultimately resulted in the penalty.

You really should look again at the tackle by Flegler. If he doesn't go high, we probably win, stone cold fact. Very poor but really, it's what we come to expect from the Bronco's head high King. He hit him in the head, 100% Flegler cost us the game.

If Kennedy doesn't drop the ball, this moment never occurs. He fucked up when it mattered.

 

[Sproj]

You really should look again at the tackle by Flegler. If he doesn't go high, we probably win, stone cold fact. Very poor but really, it's what we come to expect from the Bronco's head high King. He hit him in the head, 100% Flegler cost us the game.

If that tackle is a head high penalty, you cannot tackle anywhere anymore. He came across him at the bottom of the ribcage, there is literally nothing he could have done better. The bloke has to literally duck his head to just brush his arm and the contact force was absolutely minimal. And how about the Roosters palm straight into Flegler's face, apparently that is all good, just as Liu's shoulder charge into the head of Levi was. If you think that was a legitimate high tackle and should have been penalised, well there you go, you are more easily led by the talking heads than you imply you are.

 

[Huge]

I don't really care what Kennedy thought when he dropped it, the fact remains despite your whataboutism, that Kennedy failed to secure the ball in a simple hit up in our own end with limited time on the clock. His dropped ball allowed them to attack which ultimately resulted in the penalty.


If Kennedy doesn't drop the ball, this moment never occurs. He fucked up when it mattered.

Ha ha ha. Right. If Levi and Riki make a tackle it never happens either. Right? Flegler cost us the game. Every play leading up to it is unimportant or is at least as important as any other moment.

 

[Huge]

If that tackle is a head high penalty, you cannot tackle anywhere anymore. He came across him at the bottom of the ribcage, there is literally nothing he could have done better. The bloke has to literally duck his head to just brush his arm and the contact force was absolutely minimal. And how about the Roosters palm straight into Flegler's face, apparently that is all good, just as Liu's shoulder charge into the head of Levi was. If you think that was a legitimate high tackle and should have been penalised, well there you go, you are more easily led by the talking heads than you imply you are.

No,I don't think it was much of a tackle either and I saw 100 the same just this weekend. Fact is Flegler went high. Just below neck level, again. He's our head high number one.

 

[Renegade]

Ha ha ha. Right. If Levi and Riki make a tackle it never happens either. Right? Flegler cost us the game. Every play leading up to it is unimportant or is at least as important as any other moment.

Flegler gave away the penalty that gave them the win. Kennedy's preceding error ensured they had the opportunity to go for the win. Flegler can't give away a high tackle penalty if we're in possession, or even if we assume he's going to do something stupid which he's known for, he gives away a head high 30m out from the Roosters line. Still going to have to hail mary from that position, unlike giving away possession on our 30, which gives them a range of options (field goal to tie it up, try to win it, or the eventual penalty and shot at goal).

 

[nopatience101]

Annesley didn’t even address the challenge, just said it was a high shot & bunker had to penalise.

 

[Huge]

Flegler gave away the penalty that gave them the win. Kennedy's preceding error ensured they had the opportunity to go for the win. Flegler can't give away a high tackle penalty if we're in possession, or even if we assume he's going to do something stupid which he's known for, he gives away a head high 30m out from the Roosters line. Still going to have to hail mary from that position, unlike giving away possession on our 30, which gives them a range of options (field goal to tie it up, try to win it, or the eventual penalty and shot at goal).

Really? Can you not say that about nearly every other play? That it led to that moment? What should have happened is Glenn taking control, slowing play down before the tap. Each player instructed to tuck it under the wing , make a few metres, take your time getting up and kick on 5 to a corner. That's what should have happened.

 

[Renegade]

Really? Can you not say that about nearly every other play? That it led to that moment? What should have happened is Glenn taking control, slowing play down before the tap. Each player instructed to tuck it under the wing , make a few metres, take your time getting up and kick on 5 to a corner. That's what should have happened.

I agree, Kennedy should've secured it properly, taken the tackle and soaked up time, but he dropped it.

 

[Sproj]

No,I don't think it was much of a tackle either and I saw 100 the same just this weekend. Fact is Flegler went high. Just below neck level, again. He's our head high number one.

Again, if this is a high shot, our sport is shot (well it is and we all sadly know it). He hits him across the chest with no swinging arm and as mentioned, the Roosters' 12 has to literally duck his head to touch Flegler's arm. This is not a penalty, never has been until this exact moment. It would have never even been considered until this current idiot took over. Also, the tackle itself should not have been able to be reviewed. Not sure how any of this sequence of blunders from the NRL officialdom is '100% Flegler's fault' to directly quote you.

 

[Foordy]

Annesley didn’t even address the challenge, just said it was a high shot & bunker had to penalise.

he did at the end ... i don't blame you for not sitting through the whole media briefing

here's what he said:

NRL General Discussion Thread

Guess what shitlist we're NOT on?! I suspect we'll have more teams looking over their shoulder next year. Not Melbourne of course :brickwall: But we've pushed the Panthers twice and should have beaten the Rorters twice. I'm sure we will face tougher games too as we'll be less likely to be...

broncoshq.com

 

[Huge]

I can't believe you're blaming Levi over one single missed tackle when Kennedy missed 3 times as many!

According to NRL stats Kennedy had two missed tackles. In fact it was Levi who had more missed tackles with three, one leading directly to a try. Yes, Levi certainly deserves way more blame than Kennedy. You'd best believe I think Levi(3mt) and Riki's(5mt) defence was the breaking point. They fucking had 8 missed tackles between them ! You really ought to check the stats!

 

[nopatience101]

Annesley didn’t even address the challenge, just said it was a high shot & bunker had to penalise.

At the end of the briefing he was asked a question about the challenge process where he conceded it wasn’t the most “tidy” process, but he still claimed they could challenge it because it was an incomplete PTB.

If that’s the case it needs to be changed, you shouldn’t be allowed to make an error playing the ball & then be able to go back & challenge the entire previous play after the ref has already called tackle completed. It’s ridiculous.

 

[Huge]

Again, if this is a high shot, our sport is shot (well it is and we all sadly know it). He hits him across the chest with no swinging arm and as mentioned, the Roosters' 12 has to literally duck his head to touch Flegler's arm. This is not a penalty, never has been until this exact moment. It would have never even been considered until this current idiot took over. Also, the tackle itself should not have been able to be reviewed. Not sure how any of this sequence of blunders from the NRL officialdom is '100% Flegler's fault' to directly quote you.

If Fleglers arm is not next to the guys head he cannot hit him head high. I've watched it in slow motion several times, Flegler definitely put himself in that position, again.