POST GAME [Round 3, 2024] Broncos vs Panthers

[Organix]

Thanks for the heads up but in all honesty the game is no longer the draw card it once was so I have no interest in watching it online.

I feel you, mate

 

[McHunt]

Too obvious and too logical.
As it stands the 18th man is hardly ever used carrying an extra sub to cover injuries and/or concussions in the backs is a great idea. Coaches need to be forced to carry an outside back because majority of games they won't be used. So with 4 reserves they will stick with 3 forwards and a hooker/utility

Not hard to fix immediately in a way that I'm pretty sure every coach would like, and few fans would grumble about:

1. Coaches can draw from reserves but at the expense of a bench player. Effectively play 4 players from a possible 6 (or even unlimited). No change to interchange numbers. No disruption. No brainer, really.

2. OR, they can name a bench of 6, play any of them, but stick to the current number of interchanges. Would anticipate some grumbling.

The current rulings related to foul play and HIA would still apply.

 

[Brett Da Man LeMan]

Yeah good point

@Sproj Having said that though, early on itd be a good momentum breaker if carrigan was there in the ear of the ref questioning and doubting everything. Would also provide more breaks for defensive resets and forwards to have breathers.

 

[Brett Da Man LeMan]

then you haven't been watching him play

He was always solid overall and did the job required while adding some mongrel. Can play 3/4 of the spine, plus a lock in a pinch. Good for 1 or 2 good, game breaking plays a game.
I don't know man, I'm a gamble fan. I was sad to see him go. I know he ***** up a bit sometimes, but I think that's from trying too hard to get his team going again.

 

[Brett Da Man LeMan]

Not hard to fix immediately in a way that I'm pretty sure every coach would like, and few fans would grumble about:

1. Coaches can draw from reserves but at the expense of a bench player. Effectively play 4 players from a possible 6 (or even unlimited). No change to interchange numbers. No disruption. No brainer, really.

2. OR, they can name a bench of 6, play any of them, but stick to the current number of interchanges. Would anticipate some grumbling.

The current rulings related to foul play and HIA would still apply.

I think both ideas could work, but the first seems the more logical. The second seems more open to exploiting, so it's probably the one the nrl would go with.

 

[McHunt]

I think both ideas could work, but the first seems the more logical. The second seems more open to exploiting, so it's probably the one the nrl would go with.

Yes, it's a simple fix. Pretty sure no coach wants to waste a bench spot on an outside back or pure half, but would jump at the chance to sub one in case of injury. Oates would've had two games already this season under this system.

 

[Morkel]

Not hard to fix immediately in a way that I'm pretty sure every coach would like, and few fans would grumble about:

1. Coaches can draw from reserves but at the expense of a bench player. Effectively play 4 players from a possible 6 (or even unlimited). No change to interchange numbers. No disruption. No brainer, really.

2. OR, they can name a bench of 6, play any of them, but stick to the current number of interchanges. Would anticipate some grumbling.

The current rulings related to foul play and HIA would still apply.

I fucking hate that I love it. It's so simple, option 1 would be perfect.

And of course, if the concept were introduced to them, their response would be "Absolutely not. Teams should have to balance their 4-player interchange, and if they allowed for a back on the bench it would mean less forwards in rotation and therefore more fatigue and more open play".

 

[McHunt]

I fucking hate that I love it. It's so simple, option 1 would be perfect.

And of course, if the concept were introduced to them, their response would be "Absolutely not. Teams should have to balance their 4-player interchange, and if they allowed for a back on the bench it would mean less forwards in rotation and therefore more fatigue and more open play".

I can't think of a reasonable objection to the first option, given they already get the names before the game, so they can't kick up a stink over last minute changes.

There are plenty of other minor tweaks to interchange worth discussing. For instance:

1. If the NRL is serious about head injuries, then give off field head injury assessments a free interchange at the discretion of the referee/bunker/bullshit deterrent of your choice. Add a few mandatory conditions to squelch the squabbling over potential cheating.

2. Unlimited interchanges for the first 15 minutes or so. Or just injury triggered interchanges. Might sound a bit random, but coaches would rarely want to inject a fresh player in the first 15, yet it would be a lifesaver - and not unfair - when a player like Walsh/Piakura/Cobbo goes down early. Which, when it happens, generally ***** your entire game. Like rounds 1 and 3 for us this season.

 

[Organix]

I can't think of a reasonable objection to the first option, given they already get the names before the game, so they can't kick up a stink over last minute changes.

There are plenty of other minor tweaks to interchange worth discussing. For instance:

1. If the NRL is serious about head injuries, then give off field head injury assessments a free interchange at the discretion of the referee/bunker/bullshit deterrent of your choice. Add a few mandatory conditions to squelch the squabbling over potential cheating.

2. Unlimited interchanges for the first 15 minutes or so. Or just injury triggered interchanges. Might sound a bit random, but coaches would rarely want to inject a fresh player in the first 15, yet it would be a lifesaver - and not unfair - when a player like Walsh/Piakura/Cobbo goes down early. Which, when it happens, generally ***** your entire game. Like rounds 1 and 3 for us this season.

The only problem with option 1 would be if you have already used your four bench guys once already and then insert a new fella on to the bench through injury later, thus giving you an 18th player. I think it would be good to be able to have an extended bench, but only be able to use 4 out of 6 guys, for example. So, like have Sailor and Oates as options with the other 4 we had, but only use him if that is the way the game is going. It would bring some really interesting tactics into the game, and if every team can do it, then that is fair. It would account for injuries and you would have to decide whether you want to keep your middle rotation or reshuffle the backline.

 

[Broncapz]

We were missing Walsh, Reynolds and Haas.

Even with them, it gets frantic and directionless at times.

 

[Organix]

Watching the game again now and it is an absolute piss-take that that ref is at NRL standard. The flops from Penrith, the high shots. There was a kick through that Cobbo cleaned up and he gets taken high. Then towards the end he calls "tackled after held" on a call where he previously ruled a knock-on. He is taking calls from somewhere else and it is an absolute joke.

In brighter news, watching it again, it is clear that we were going to have a hard night out with Penrith. They were strong, but also grubby (which I fucking hate seeing). However, I was really proud of the boys that they kept going and even clawed those two tries back, despite Penrith deliberately slowing the ruck to alter momentum (sickening to watch). We aren't cooked yet, and Ezra really stepped up and took control. Everyone was cramping, but they kept tackling. If we made a few less errors earlier on, and if we had a full strength team, it would have been a much different match.

I will also pay good money for anyone to punch Luai and Cleary multiple times in the face.

 

[McHunt]

The only problem with option 1 would be if you have already used your four bench guys once already and then insert a new fella on to the bench through injury later, thus giving you an 18th player. I think it would be good to be able to have an extended bench, but only be able to use 4 out of 6 guys, for example. So, like have Sailor and Oates as options with the other 4 we had, but only use him if that is the way the game is going. It would bring some really interesting tactics into the game, and if every team can do it, then that is fair. It would account for injuries and you would have to decide whether you want to keep your middle rotation or reshuffle the backline.

If it's 15 to go and you've used all four, too bad. Business as usual.

 

[Nerd]

Watching the game again now and it is an absolute piss-take that that ref is at NRL standard. The flops from Penrith, the high shots. There was a kick through that Cobbo cleaned up and he gets taken high. Then towards the end he calls "tackled after held" on a call where he previously ruled a knock-on. He is taking calls from somewhere else and it is an absolute joke.

I've been saying this for years. The ref pool needs to be enlarged to include Brisbane based refs. This crap about all the refs having to be based in Sydney because that's where they train is just a cop out from the NRL. All the refs can have a video hook up once a week to discuss which rules they are going to mess with this round and we get more than double the number of refs to pick from as lets face it the quality of refereeing seems to be dropping year on year.

What turns me off watching non Broncos games is how the interpretation of rules can vary from ref to ref. I blame all the constant rule changes we see every year and especially the disaster that is the 6 again rule which can and is abused by refs with no retrospection.

My fix would be to go back to how it was in the 90's when as soon as a ref called held the defenders had to roll away from the tackled player and none of this crap where the ref calls held then waits a second before calling release and then players peel away from the tackled player one at a time. They could then ditch the 6 again disaster and just go back to a penalty if a team attempts to slow the tackle too much or is inside the 10 in defence. This will badly hurt teams like Penrith and the Storm but would make all games much faster and so much better to watch.

 

[theshed]

Never going to beat Penrith with 4 of our 4 most important players out.

Obviously not a fair game to completely judge someone on but I haven’t seen anything from Madden that tells me he’ll be a consistent first grader.

 

[bazza]

Never going to beat Penrith with 4 of our 4 most important players out.

Obviously not a fair game to completely judge someone on but I haven’t seen anything from Madden that tells me he’ll be a consistent first grader.

I think Madden would be better suited to be a running five-eighth instead of a game managing halfback. Unfortunately for Madden, we already have Ezra Mam for that.

I think Madden has decent fundamentals, but his long kicking game and organisation is below par for a halfback.

There are really not many options available out there to replace Reynolds.

 

[Wolfie]

just when you think Brent Read has gone complete down the NRL 360 Rabbit hole ... he comes out with todays article calling out the NRL for double standards in not charging May. also said that in the Super League or Yawnion, May would likely have been sent off

The thing is, i think the head clash was absolutely accidental. The tackle and the way it happened was still dangerous and reckless. Doesnt have to be deliberate to be dangerous.

 

[Wolfie]

Never going to beat Penrith with 4 of our 4 most important players out.

Obviously not a fair game to completely judge someone on but I haven’t seen anything from Madden that tells me he’ll be a consistent first grader.

I think it would have been a close game if Walsh stayed on the field. I said it in the game thread, but he makes us dangerous, and not having to move Cobbo then makes our backline dangerous because we dont have back rowers in the backline. Taking Walsh out makes us easier to defend against. Penrith can then play without much fear of our attack.

 

[Wolfie]

I mean Cleary isn't exactly a small guy.

Hard to get close to him to make a tackle with that chin