LIVE Round 23 Discussion

Sproj

International Rep
Staff
15,116
7,821
Darryl Halligan is painful to listen to as he fights against the words trying to escape from his mouth.
 

Morkel

International Captain
Staff
20,595
16,866
I hate it when the players do it, but there doesn't appear to be a lot of consistency. Last week Wests took two big dives (Woods & Eisenhuth) and were rewarded for it.

I'll have to see it for myself, but obviously the referees can't go into the game with prejudices.
No but if they know a player has tried to make a situation look worse by deliberately playing for it, then they have every reason to be skeptical if they try it again in the future.
 

Dexter

NRL Captain
4,997
1,984
**** Manly, BUt... it should have been a penalty. The Tigers player wasn't going at the inside shoulder, more straight into DCE.
I'm not sure why they didn't show the head on (FOX) until after the try was awarded. I assume the bunker saw it though.
DCE maybe could have slid off earlier but he had to make a decision which affected the decision of the players outside him to come in. Bottom line for me is technically it was obstruction.

Anway, **** Manly.
 

Tom

State of Origin Rep
6,634
5,723
I'm not Big Pete Big Pete but it was clear as day a try. Even without prejudice, DCE was clearly not impeded at all so had no right to even complain.
Also my opinion, he tried to play it as best he could without taking a big soccer dive because he has already done that one this season against us.
 

Big Pete

International Captain
25,412
9,733
Brisbane
Seen the DCE incident yet Big Pete Big Pete? Am keen to get your thoughts.
I'd have to see the other angle Dex is referring to, but based on the live footage it looks like a carbon copy of the Round 10 clash where Cherry-Evans misread the play and was rewarded. It looked like Chee Kam planned to run on the outside shoulder of Cherry-Evans who then stepped into him and was taken front on.

At the very least, it isn't inconsistent. The other week, the Panthers exploited gaps that were exposed by defenders staying in the line obstructing the inside shoulder of the defender.

In other words, give him the chicken.

No but if they know a player has tried to make a situation look worse by deliberately playing for it, then they have every reason to be skeptical if they try it again in the future.
When you start including priors and other indicators that's when the rules get messy and the referees develop tunnel vision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom

Dexter

NRL Captain
4,997
1,984
The only thing that should matter is where the tigers player was running. That is what defensive decisions are based on and why it should have been a penalty. As soon as DCE made his decision the other players followed him in. The Tigers player stopped on his run because he was going to run into DCE .
I always try and base my opinion on, if that happened to my team, and I would feel ripped.
 

Huge

State of Origin Rep
7,012
4,036
Ipswich
Terrible forward pass at the end but Barrett was very wise at the presser saying basically Manly got what they deserved.
 

Dexter

NRL Captain
4,997
1,984
Terrible forward pass at the end but Barrett was very wise at the presser saying basically Manly got what they deserved.
And they did. They didn't put the Tigpies away and those 50 50 calls tend to go against you when a team is running you down.
 

Big Pete

International Captain
25,412
9,733
Brisbane
The only thing that should matter is where the tigers player was running. That is what defensive decisions are based on and why it should have been a penalty. As soon as DCE made his decision the other players followed him in. The Tigers player stopped on his run because he was going to run into DCE .
I always try and base my opinion on, if that happened to my team, and I would feel ripped.
It looked like he was running the right line though and Cherry-Evans has deliberately misread the situation, just like he did in Round 10 where it should have been a try.
 

Super Freak

International Captain
Staff
25,224
12,544
Brisbane
It was a situation that could have gone either way and it has gone the way of the defending team in the past.

I'm glad common sense prevailed. DCE misread it and made the decision to come in on Chee Kam and then tried to play for the penalty once he released he fucked up.
 

MrTickyM

QCup Player
419
321
**** Manly, BUt... it should have been a penalty. The Tigers player wasn't going at the inside shoulder, more straight into DCE.
I'm not sure why they didn't show the head on (FOX) until after the try was awarded. I assume the bunker saw it though.
DCE maybe could have slid off earlier but he had to make a decision which affected the decision of the players outside him to come in. Bottom line for me is technically it was obstruction.

Anway, **** Manly.
My thinking was that the tigers player never actually made it into the Manly defensive line, rather DCE jumped half a metre into the player to initiate the contact. Surely it can't be an obstruction if you don't actually get to the line?
 

Sproj

International Rep
Staff
15,116
7,821
My thinking was that the tigers player never actually made it into the Manly defensive line, rather DCE jumped half a metre into the player to initiate the contact. Surely it can't be an obstruction if you don't actually get to the line?
Exactly!
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create free account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Login or Register

Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Register now

Twitter

Top