POST GAME Round 8 - Rabbitohs vs Broncos

[Morkel]

Lol, NRL360 right now......guess what they're discussing and dissecting?

On the Sims try, Ikin explains the RULE....Paul Kents response "well it's a stupid rule"....Still a rule you dense ****.

**** they are idiots. Just because they don't know the rules it's the Broncos' fault and we're being favoured?

So they should have been raging at the Kahu no-try against the Dogs because the rule is stupid? Kahu didn't know the rule, he's a turkey. But the self-designated experts don't know the rules and they're justice warriors?

 

[BroncsFan]

Didn't Eastwood come off for a HIA this afternoon but not till after he made a tackle which got the Dogs the ball back, then the trainer came and took him from the field? If it was a HIA, no commentator mentioned that. Maybe I got it wrong ....

I haven't seen footage of the Eastwood incident but listening on the radio, they were indicating that Eastwood appeared to be refusing because his injury was leg related and the trainer was trying to pull him off for a HIA to get the free interchange.

If this is true then the dogs have pretty well been caught cheating... That should be a bigger blow up than the Broncos using the process correctly. A trainer isn't paid to be a doctor and assess head injuries he made the assessment to the level that he can... I like how it isn't noted that milf passed the concussion test as well meaning the trainer effectively made the correct call in the end

 

[_wwong]

Souffs back 13-14 metres all game,
Us back 8 metres hahahaha
That'll do me.

Just like the sims try, get out the tape measure.

 

[BroncsFan]

Just like the sims try, get out the tape measure.

I'd like to know where they get their footage from. I've been watching footy for awhile now and even on an offside penalty they barely show footage of the line not getting back the ten... Yet it seems everyone else has that footage for the whole game and are keeping stats on it!!

Might need a bigger tv...

 

[Morkel]

I'd like to know where they get their footage from. I've been watching footy for awhile now and even on an offside penalty they barely show footage of the line not getting back the ten... Yet it seems everyone else has that footage for the whole game and are keeping stats on it!!

Might need a bigger tv...

It's hard to tell how far a team is actually back, as the cameras stay in tight until the ball gets spread or a break is made. So of-sides are tricky unless a defender shoots out and in to frame early.

It is though quite easy to tell how far back the ref is holding a team, and it fluctuates so dramatically that it would take a very trusting person to believe it's not deliberate. Like square-up penalties, it is so easy to manufacture momentum shifts. It is rare that the tight camera shot will have two field lines (measuring 10 metres apart) in the frame, especially where the ruck is, but as the camera pans to follow the runner, you can see the play-the-ball spot and then the line that the ref was holding, and I shit you not that during South's resurgence we were being held back 13-14 metres.

 

[Astro]

I haven't seen footage of the Eastwood incident but listening on the radio, they were indicating that Eastwood appeared to be refusing because his injury was leg related and the trainer was trying to pull him off for a HIA to get the free interchange.

If this is true then the dogs have pretty well been caught cheating... That should be a bigger blow up than the Broncos using the process correctly. A trainer isn't paid to be a doctor and assess head injuries he made the assessment to the level that he can... I like how it isn't noted that milf passed the concussion test as well meaning the trainer effectively made the correct call in the end

Yeah the trainer was trying to get him off the field at least three times. And that's the difference. Broncos trainer cleared milf straight away and got over turned by the doctor after reviewing. Eastwood refused to follow the trainers request to leave the field until the dogs got the ball back.

 

[papabear]

Call me biased but my thoughts were, rabbitohs werent hard done by by the refs, they were just a bit unlucky.

The kick deflection onside try, as crappy a try as that is, was still a try, unlucky for the bunnies but still a try.

The last broncos try, i thought was exactly right, wasnt the prettiest of tries, but fair dinkum it was still a try (i disagree with the refs boss here) if you are allowed ages to plant the ball, which you are, the ball is still live so if it comes free backwards, play on in my book.

The knock on with the drop goal, correct me if im wrong he faked off his wrong foot and kicked a field goal, maybe a knock on could have been called, maybe... This was the only 50-50 call that could have gone the other way in my book.

Anyways Souths still have a couple of minutes to go and get a good set and make an absolute meal of it.

The raiders on the other hand.

Cop the same shitty lucky kick deflection try to get the broncos back in it (correct me if im wrong but I heard the tigers got one too).

Fair enough luck goes that way.

But to lose the game a one on one strip gives a penalty that they take the game with, no chance to respond, yes the raiders had a thousand chances and fucked up the game royally on anybodys watching but imo, the refs were worse and more impactful on the result in our match then the broncos match.

 

[Super Freak]

Webcke and Trevor, two former Broncos players, on Channel 7 having a whinge about Broncos blockers when the field goal happened..

There were no fucking blockers.

 

[Thelmus]

There are always blockers, anytime anyone goes for a field goal, or a kick of any kind. its just the way the game is played nowadays. Its like saying fish are wet. Teams perfect these set moves. Any side with any nouse does it. I'd preferred it wasn't so but it is, and both would be doing it on friday. Its just the broncos kicked theirs.

 

[Morkel]

Webcke and Trevor, two former Broncos players, on Channel 7 having a whinge about Broncos blockers when the field goal happened..

There were no fucking blockers.

They would have cried in their paychecks if they saw the Roosters blockers against the Dragons. Lined up beside the play-the-ball, in line with the hooker, just standing there to prevent the markers from getting through.

 

[BroncsFan]

If they just enforced the 10m when going for a shot at field goal then teams wouldn't need to build a wall up just to get a shot in.

It's just another byproduct caused by the refs/NRL choosing to ignore rules so the refs don't directly cost a team.

 

[Alec]

If they just enforced the 10m when going for a shot at field goal then teams wouldn't need to build a wall up just to get a shot in.

It's just another byproduct caused by the refs/NRL choosing to ignore rules so the refs don't directly cost a team.

That's a pretty good point. The refs become incompetent in these situations, allow teams can get away with almost anything, so you'd be stupid not to take advantage of that.

 

[BRC088]

Same thing happened in '15 GF, JT was about the only player behind the play of the ball, everyone else blocking.

 

[Big Pete]

Came across this in my YouTube feed. I missed the segment on Monday, but it does a pretty good job of summarizing the media's perception of what unfolded.

I've got to say I actually agree with a lot of the points they raised. I think the NRL's perception of when a player is held up over the line is distorted. It's been that way ever since the 2002 NRL Grand Final where Fitziggon was allowed to twist his body over the line, even though he had been pinned to the ground prior by a Warriors defender. It's just escalated from there and that's how an instance like the Milford play was let go.

I also find it odd that the bunker can review elements of a field goal, but not the entire play.

I also have to hand it to the 360 team. I'm so glad they mentioned the George Burgess shoulder charge because it highlighted how stupid the Rabbitohs players were and how they can't feel hard done by.

 

[Morkel]

Same thing happened in '15 GF, JT was about the only player behind the play of the ball, everyone else blocking.

And they had a wall beside the scrum, well off-side before the ball had even been fed.

 

[Super Freak]

Came across this in my YouTube feed. I missed the segment on Monday, but it does a pretty good job of summarizing the media's perception of what unfolded.

I've got to say I actually agree with a lot of the points they raised. I think the NRL's perception of when a player is held up over the line is distorted. It's been that way ever since the 2002 NRL Grand Final where Fitziggon was allowed to twist his body over the line, even though he had been pinned to the ground prior by a Warriors defender. It's just escalated from there and that's how an instance like the Milford play was let go.

I also find it odd that the bunker can review elements of a field goal, but not the entire play.

I also have to hand it to the 360 team. I'm so glad they mentioned the George Burgess shoulder charge because it highlighted how stupid the Rabbitohs players were and how they can't feel hard done by.

In all of the years I've been watching Rugby League and reading Paul Kent's articles, I've never once seem him blow up about that rule around the Korbin Sims try until the Broncos benefited from it.

That rule has been in place for over two decades. Actually I think longer, but the 10 metres part was introduced in 1991 I believe.

That kind of thing has happened quite a few times over the past few years, but I never see him so a word about it.. Until now.

 

[BroncsFan]

I also find it odd that the bunker can review elements of a field goal, but not the entire play.

The bunker should be able to look at it but again this would end up showing that half the team is offside when taking the shot and the other team has 10 blockers in front of the kicker.

It would cause hysteria if a ref ever decided to check one field goal and not another... could you imagine if a field goal was disallowed in golden point because of blockers and the team went down the other end, off a penalty, to slot the game winner.

The issue would also be that the refs would never check a missed field goal for offside players

 

[Big Pete]

It's a complex issue, but I don't share those concerns because the officials are already making those mistakes. They're supposed to be checking for foul play (eg. a wall, off-side etc.) but as we saw yesterday and the Panthers/Canberra game from last year, the referees are still picking and choosing when to send it up-stairs.

The NRL already has a rule in place where certain infringements take priority over others. We saw that in the 2013 ANZAC game where New Zealand were denied a try and possession after they gave away a penalty after an Australian lost the ball. In this instance, if Anthony Milford knocked on, but it turned out Farah was off-side at marker, than the off-side would take precedence.