Round 23 Discussion

[KingWebcke]

I didn't watch it but maybe he'll cop a suspension which should kill his dally m voting, I think it's -3 per suspension week.

Cronk wont cop a suspension but I would be shocked if he got any votes either. Smith and Slater were the only Storm players who looked good enough to earn votes and even they were pretty subdued by their standards.

 

[Big Pete]

I didn't catch the game, just a report on FoxSports and they played it out like Cronk was the MotM.

 

[Mr Fourex]

He didn't really show it in the NYC when he had the chance. It was always Cornish who was showing more control. Milford was the instinct player who just played what was ahead of him superbly.

If we want to turn him into an organiser then we're going to have to build it from scratch in my opinion.

Maybe that's the thing KW .....does he have to be a great organiser to be a 5/8?

If you take a look at Carney for example, I wouldn't call him a great organiser (He has Robson doing most of that for him). Carney's strengths are in his running and passing game.

 

[KingWebcke]

Maybe that's the thing KW .....does he have to be a great organiser to be a 5/8?

If you take a look at Carney for example, I wouldn't call him a great organiser (He has Robson doing most of that for him). Carney's strengths are in his running and passing game.

I think you do these days, to a limited extent. Carney isn't a great organiser but he had experience from his time at Canberra and he does a decent job of it at Cronulla. With split halves I think there is less responsibility on one half to do all the organising like in days gone. But it is expected that both do a bit of it, which is a task that I think is still quite difficult and I don't know that Milford is at all suited to it.

You can get away with your five-eight not organising but it isn't desirable. For example Canberra don't look terrible with McCrone but I think they would be a much improved side if McCrone learned to think a few more plays ahead.

 

[KingWebcke]

I didn't catch the game, just a report on FoxSports and they played it out like Cronk was the MotM.

Maybe he will get points then. I wasn't that impressed though. He put in a deft kick for the winning try and made another nice run but the rest of his game was really off. The calm control wasn't there and his kicking game was way out.

I thought Mullen played as well as Cronk and you could probably even put Mullen ahead thanks to a couple really important bits of cover defence.

 

[Dexter]

I agree with Bennett that the refs. need to exercise the sin bin more regularly. No doubt Cronk should have been binned, not only for the contact on Boyd but also on his infringement on one of the Knights backs. It's ridiculous and like Wayne said, this isn't the first time this has happened - the Roosters game was another prime example where the other team kept using illegal spoiling tactics continuously and nothing was done about it.

Dex - I really like Mansour as a prospect too. Didn't have a lot of luck this season with injury but he just looks like a well rounded player. His second try in the corner was special and he'd be one of those players I'd be grooming for Origin.

Speaking of Penrith wingers, how good is Dave Simmons going? 19 tries in 21 games! To me, it just goes to show that you don't need a superstar winger to do a job out there - just a really solid player who can do a job. Similar story with Everingham.

Bennett is 100% correct. The Chooks in particular are more than happy to concede penalties then back their online defence. They remind me of their sides in the early 2000s with that aggressive defence which seems to get up a little to quickly.
I have a theory that they just keep doing it so much the refs stop pinging them for fear of over penalising but the benefits they gain outweigh the penalties they give.

The Penrith wingers really highlight what we didn't get from Maranta when he was in our side, just chalk and cheese when it comes to their contribution to the side.

 

[KingWebcke]

Simmons' try where he launched himself into Locke was amazing. The incredible human cannonball.

 

[Anonymous person]

if you start sin binning players for what cronk did youd have to sin bin 10 players a match. he took out a player without the ball, nothing more. every time someone chips over the top and is taken out by a forward do you want them sin binned? every time a centre takes out a chaser who is trying to contest a bomb do you want them sin binned? i certainly dont.

a penalty was sufficient. i thought it was absolutely pathetic that the referee went to the video referee in the first place for that. never seen a video referee have to determine if a bomb that landed 10m out of the goals, caught on the full by the defending fullback, and never got within 10m of the try line, was a try. thats a misuse of the video referee imo. you cant stop a play on half way and ask the video referee to check for a try just so you can see if someone dropped the ball in a tackle, why were they allowed to do this?

 

[KingWebcke]

if you start sin binning players for what cronk did youd have to sin bin 10 players a match. he took out a player without the ball, nothing more. every time someone chips over the top and is taken out by a forward do you want them sin binned? every time a centre takes out a chaser who is trying to contest a bomb do you want them sin binned? i certainly dont.

Not at all. I think Cronk's was distinct from the kind of blocks you see every game, which are often legal. What you're arguing is kind of equivalent to saying we shouldn't have red cards for serious swinging arms because there are loads of high tackles every game and we don't want 10 players sent off per match. there are different levels for every type of infraction and that is why the referee is given a variety of different levels to escalate the penalty to.

I think Cooper's tackle on Darius Boyd was noticeably different. Cronk did more than just block and in the context of the play it was a deliberate attempt to stop what he [Cronk] thought was potentially going to be a try. I've been following rugby league for close to 30 years and during that entire time I'd say (and most others too) that was a professional foul and worth 10 in the bin.

and i dont' think binning Cronk for that would set a precedent for binning tonnes of other players any time there is contact away from the ball ...

 

[Fozz]

AP, if you can't see the difference between Cronk tackling a player without a ball and a block then I think you should get a guide dog.

He wasn't in front of Boyd or alongside him, he was beaten and he was not going to get anywhere near him so he brought him down. Simple professional foul. But the Storm live a charmed life with the refs (even with that massive penalty count against them, it could have been worse) so Cronk gets off.

 

[Anonymous person]

im not talking about "blocks", im talking about players deliberately taking out chasers. see matt cooper on israel folau in origin, or pretty much 9/10 times cronk/cherry evans/benji chip over the top of the defense.

just because cronks was super obvious doesnt mean its worse. deliberate is deliberate. sin bin one you sin bin them all.

 

[Mr Fourex]

I think it was a 50/50 call......to bin or not to bin

that is the question.

IMO Cronk was committed to the tackle..........ended up doing a mixture of following through v pulling out.

 

[Browny]

Daniel Anderson agrees with AP

 

[Morkel]

I have Cronk in my SC team and an obvious bias towards him performing well. And i feel extremely lucky that he didn't get 10 in the bin, he clearly deserved it. It wasn't a block or a deviated run, he grabbed the player by the jersey and held on. Professional foul all the way.

 

[KingWebcke]

just because cronks was super obvious doesnt mean its worse. deliberate is deliberate. sin bin one you sin bin them all.

I think that misses a large part of what a 'professional foul' is though. it isn't just if the action is deliberate, or the effectiveness of the tackle (because lets face it, Boyd definitely milked it). It is the context that it was taken in: Cronk tried to hold up Boyd because Boyd was charging for a Mullen kick and there was a significant chance of a try being scored.

That is actually the important part of the decision in my opinion and what separates it from instances of a centre changing their path to block a chaser or tackling a player on suspicion. It is the same reason that you only get a penalty for holding down in the ruck but if you do the same thing as a fullback after a big line break you get sin-binned.

 

[Anonymous person]

I think that misses a large part of what a 'professional foul' is though. it isn't just if the action is deliberate, or the effectiveness of the tackle (because lets face it, Boyd definitely milked it). It is the context that it was taken in: Cronk tried to hold up Boyd because Boyd was charging for a Mullen kick and there was a significant chance of a try being scored.

That is actually the important part of the decision in my opinion and what separates it from instances of a centre changing their path to block a chaser or tackling a player on suspicion. It is the same reason that you only get a penalty for holding down in the ruck but if you do the same thing as a fullback after a big line break you get sin-binned.

there was no more significant chance of a try than any other centre deliberately changing his line to take out a winger going for a bomb. In fact there is less chance because Slater caught the ball 10m out from the try line.

the context doesn't make it any more of a professional foul. Had Slater not been there at all then sure, its a sin bin every day of the week. Slater was there though, so its just a penalty.

the Melbourne hate on here is just ridiculous. Cronk took him out illegally, he got penalized. Case closed. Just cause he's from Melbourne doesn't mean he should be sin binned.

 

[KingWebcke]

there was no more significant chance of a try than any other centre deliberately changing his line to take out a winger going for a bomb. In fact there is less chance because Slater caught the ball 10m out from the try line.

yeah, after you watch Slater catch the kick a try seems unlikely but at the moment the kick went up I honestly thought there was a significant chance of a try occurring and I think Cronk did too. That fits pretty neatly with the definition of a professional foul as I've always known it.

the Melbourne hate on here is just ridiculous. Cronk took him out illegally, he got penalized. Case closed. Just cause he's from Melbourne doesn't mean he should be sin binned.

I don't think this has that much to do with Melbourne hate. It is something that a significant number of people I've heard thought should be a sin-binning. I'm sure a few of them are driven by an pathological hatred for the Storm but I think that would be a minority

 

[Twiztid]

Must be an even up after Josh Reynolds took out Justin O'Neill in round 18 and didn't get binned.