The Anti-Bronco Conspiracy

Xzei · Apr 10, 2023

Big Del said:
Rapana caught the ball clean .
Tapau`s knee smashed into his head . He lets go of the ball as a reaction . Penalty for contacting the head .

The ref may not have seen Tapau`s knee glance the head . Replay showed it . Bunker over ruled . End of story .

The game could , and should have been won long before that hail Mary .

Still doesnt make the decision any less wrong

Big Del · Apr 10, 2023

Foordy said:
It was interesting watch Freddy try to out the blame on Flegs for getting knocked out. because Flegs was the defender ... Defenders shouldn't have to try and avoid a swinging elbow on top of everything else that is put on them these days.

IMO, both situations are very similar in that they were both clear accidents even though contact was made with the head. either they are both penalties or both ruled as accidentally, so play on

Like Freddy said attackers get more protection than defenders .
Defenders have a duty of care .

Nashy · Apr 10, 2023

Big Del said:
Like Freddy said attackers get more protection than defenders .
Defenders have a duty of care .

They didn't even do this consistently in the same game.

It was a load of shit call that doesn't match the majority of accidents in the game. Anything arguing for it is nothing more than some weird troll to go against the grain of what is considered normal.

Foordy · Apr 10, 2023

Big Del said:
Like Freddy said attackers get more protection than defenders .
Defenders have a duty of care .

attackers still are not permitted to make contact with the head.

Morkel · Apr 10, 2023

Foordy said:
attackers still are not permitted to make contact with the head.

That's right. Attackers get penalised if they hold their elbow up and hit defenders in the throat or face. A windly swinging elbow is not deliberate, but it is definitely careless, how is that any different to what happened with Taupau.

If Rapana doesn't lose the ball, it's play on. No penalty would have been forthcoming. The NRL kneejerked because he lost the ball and the game would potentially have been decided by an accident.

Allo · Apr 10, 2023

I find it funny that Billy is so concerned about the duty of care of players when he played for one of the grubbiest, most-injury-causing teams of all time.

And he himself enjoyed sliding in studs-up when players were diving over to score or blatant shoulder-charging because he was such a weakling that he couldn’t tackle properly

Fucking hypocrite

Big Del · Apr 10, 2023

Foordy said:
attackers still are not permitted to make contact with the head.

You sure about that ?
Bumpers and don`t argues are in every game .

Big Del · Apr 10, 2023

Morkel said:
That's right. Attackers get penalised if they hold their elbow up and hit defenders in the throat or face. A windly swinging elbow is not deliberate, but it is definitely careless, how is that any different to what happened with Taupau.

If Rapana doesn't lose the ball, it's play on. No penalty would have been forthcoming. The NRL kneejerked because he lost the ball and the game would potentially have been decided by an accident.

If Rapana didn`t lose the ball he would have stayed on the ground and milked a penalty once the bunker saw a replay . Same out come .

People putting so much weight on that incident . What about the litany of errors by the Broncos themselves that bombed opportunities earlier in the game ?

Nashy · Apr 10, 2023

Big Del said:
If Rapana didn`t lose the ball he would have stayed on the ground and milked a penalty once the bunker saw a replay . Same out come .

People putting so much weight on that incident . What about the litany of errors by the Broncos themselves that bombed opportunities earlier in the game ?

There are tonnes of threads discussing the team, this particular one is more focussed on our useless refs and their interpretation of certain rules.

What exactly did you expect the convo to be in a thread called "The Anti-Broncos Conspiracy"?

LittleDavey · Apr 10, 2023

Morkel said:
That's right. Attackers get penalised if they hold their elbow up and hit defenders in the throat or face. A windly swinging elbow is not deliberate, but it is definitely careless, how is that any different to what happened with Taupau.

If Rapana doesn't lose the ball, it's play on. No penalty would have been forthcoming. The NRL kneejerked because he lost the ball and the game would potentially have been decided by an accident.

Exactly this.

Big Del said:
If Rapana didn`t lose the ball he would have stayed on the ground and milked a penalty once the bunker saw a replay . Same out come .

People putting so much weight on that incident . What about the litany of errors by the Broncos themselves that bombed opportunities earlier in the game ?

See above. If Rapana isn't injured, gets up and plays the ball, play would have continued. We got penalised for the injury, not the incident. That's wrong, and Joey nails it in his assessment.

Both players did exactly what they should do - Rapana caught the ball and got to ground as fast as he could; Marty was coming through with intent to tackle the player with the ball as close to his goal line as possible. The argument "Jordan could not have done anything different" is bullshit, Rapana could have jumped for the ball, which would have kept his head out of a dangerous situation. It also would have probably gotten him driven back into the in-goal, so he chose not to do that. What's Marty meant to do, hang back and not go near him in case his head is near the ground? Bullshit.

Accidents happen, accidental contact to the head in a situation where the player's head is around someone's knees has never been a legitimate penalty. We're not talking about the litany of errors, the boys played like garbage and got the result they deserved, no-one is arguing that.

Big Del · Apr 10, 2023

LittleDavey said:
Rapana could have jumped for the ball,

Nah .
How many guys jump to catch spiral bombs ? Not many , if any .

The way they float and move in the air , a jump is gonna result in an air swing .

papabear · Apr 11, 2023

Morkel said:
That's right. Attackers get penalised if they hold their elbow up and hit defenders in the throat or face. A windly swinging elbow is not deliberate, but it is definitely careless, how is that any different to what happened with Taupau.

If Rapana doesn't lose the ball, it's play on. No penalty would have been forthcoming. The NRL kneejerked because he lost the ball and the game would potentially have been decided by an accident.

from memory that wildly swinging elbow was as a result of a broncos players putting a big hit on the raiders player.

I.e. the elbow to the head was contacting the second man in not a wildly swinging elbow at the first man.

From a raiders perspective:-
Two knock ons were called against us due to adam reynolds refereeing which imo the replays didnt show a drop, the ball shifting in your own hands is fine (so long as it doesnt contact the ground or the opponent.

The challenged call depends on the rule - it was forward of the hands then backwards off his legs (without contacting the ground or opponent in between). Maybe this was right but usually a ref would call a knock back in the field of play if the ball ends up going backwards.

For the first 60 minutes we didnt get one holding down or head high penalty (marginal ones of these happen all the time in rugby league) for instance i think it was late in the second half reece walsh was falling and got taken slightly high on a nothing tackle off a kick return and got the penalty.

I dont recall any midfield 3/4th tackle penalties going to the raiders I recall two going to the broncos. These are the worst as you have to defend 10 tackles in a row and they are usually as a result of a good kick, the defending team putting pressure on and the ref going with some home town harry get em on side ref crap. switches the momentum... whereas the 10 tackles in a row on your try line are usually as a result of the defensive team (maybe not on purpose) but not being particular enthusiastic to get off the tackle as they dont want to risk a fast ptb... and the attacking team already has momentum.

I think the raiders finished with 46% or so of possession.

The raiders were playing with
1 - kris - back up
2 - rapana
3 - croker - back up to kris and had been behind HSS until he showed what a bog average footy player he was.
4 - timoko
5 - hoppa - back up to cotric
6 - schneider -back to frawley who is the back up to wighton.
7 - fogarty
8 - papa - not a back up but still warming up to the season....
9 - woolford - back up to levi, dont know why as he is better but levi had to get his jaw broken for levi to be picked.
10 - emre guler - benchie - one of the softest middles going around got the starting gig due to tapines first child being born.
11 - Hudson Young
12 - whitehead - should not be ahead of CHN but ricky is special in that regard.
13 - horsbrough

That game was there for the broncos to win, the raiders fired up and played committed for the full 80 minutes but the skill level and size clearly had a disparity in the broncos favour.

You just had 5 in a row came up against a team who had just been pumped and ultimately lost the effort battle which is huge in rugby league.

As for the rapana situation, best case scenario for the broncos was starting the play the ball for the raiders. Rapana has a bad rap as a milker so perhaps thats why the rf thought he dropped the ball to force a situation, but once the ref looked at it you could hardly give a different decision the way the game is reffed nowadays taupaus knee at full steam to the head without another player in the tackle, you know if you go full steam in rugby league without any laterla balance it can go wrong. He was trying to make a play for his team and it didn't work, happens in every second game.

Similarly Papalii copped a shoulder to the face and the ref / video ref called play on and you can rest assured if that was papaliis shoulder to someone elses face 9 times out ten in the same circumstances a penalty is given.

papabear · Apr 11, 2023

LittleDavey said:
Exactly this.

See above. If Rapana isn't injured, gets up and plays the ball, play would have continued. We got penalised for the injury, not the incident. That's wrong, and Joey nails it in his assessment.

Both players did exactly what they should do - Rapana caught the ball and got to ground as fast as he could; Marty was coming through with intent to tackle the player with the ball as close to his goal line as possible. The argument "Jordan could not have done anything different" is bullshit, Rapana could have jumped for the ball, which would have kept his head out of a dangerous situation. It also would have probably gotten him driven back into the in-goal, so he chose not to do that. What's Marty meant to do, hang back and not go near him in case his head is near the ground? Bullshit.

Accidents happen, accidental contact to the head in a situation where the player's head is around someone's knees has never been a legitimate penalty. We're not talking about the litany of errors, the boys played like garbage and got the result they deserved, no-one is arguing that.

it was an accident.

but marty if his reaction time isnt good enough to dodge the head going at the pace is taking that risk (ie to step jump do whatever to not take rapanas head out).

Wighton put a cracking tackle on in the newcastle match was similar steaming through tackled the FB in goal but due to him coming through at pace and not having complete lateral balance his tackle is a touch high and the newcaslte player is diving for the field of play, we cop a penalty against us.. Nobody is injured - wightons play was a more coordinated and better play then marty taupaus, the contact was lower and still a penalty was given.

Sproj · Apr 11, 2023

papabear said:
from memory that wildly swinging elbow was as a result of a broncos players putting a big hit on the raiders player.

I.e. the elbow to the head was contacting the second man in not a wildly swinging elbow at the first man.

From a raiders perspective:-
Two knock ons were called against us due to adam reynolds refereeing which imo the replays didnt show a drop, the ball shifting in your own hands is fine (so long as it doesnt contact the ground or the opponent.

The challenged call depends on the rule - it was forward of the hands then backwards off his legs (without contacting the ground or opponent in between). Maybe this was right but usually a ref would call a knock back in the field of play if the ball ends up going backwards.

For the first 60 minutes we didnt get one holding down or head high penalty (marginal ones of these happen all the time in rugby league) for instance i think it was late in the second half reece walsh was falling and got taken slightly high on a nothing tackle off a kick return and got the penalty.

I dont recall any midfield 3/4th tackle penalties going to the raiders I recall two going to the broncos. These are the worst as you have to defend 10 tackles in a row and they are usually as a result of a good kick, the defending team putting pressure on and the ref going with some home town harry get em on side ref crap. switches the momentum... whereas the 10 tackles in a row on your try line are usually as a result of the defensive team (maybe not on purpose) but not being particular enthusiastic to get off the tackle as they dont want to risk a fast ptb... and the attacking team already has momentum.

I think the raiders finished with 46% or so of possession.

The raiders were playing with
1 - kris - back up
2 - rapana
3 - croker - back up to kris and had been behind HSS until he showed what a bog average footy player he was.
4 - timoko
5 - hoppa - back up to cotric
6 - schneider -back to frawley who is the back up to wighton.
7 - fogarty
8 - papa - not a back up but still warming up to the season....
9 - woolford - back up to levi, dont know why as he is better but levi had to get his jaw broken for levi to be picked.
10 - emre guler - benchie - one of the softest middles going around got the starting gig due to tapines first child being born.
11 - Hudson Young
12 - whitehead - should not be ahead of CHN but ricky is special in that regard.
13 - horsbrough

That game was there for the broncos to win, the raiders fired up and played committed for the full 80 minutes but the skill level and size clearly had a disparity in the broncos favour.

You just had 5 in a row came up against a team who had just been pumped and ultimately lost the effort battle which is huge in rugby league.

As for the rapana situation, best case scenario for the broncos was starting the play the ball for the raiders. Rapana has a bad rap as a milker so perhaps thats why the rf thought he dropped the ball to force a situation, but once the ref looked at it you could hardly give a different decision the way the game is reffed nowadays taupaus knee at full steam to the head without another player in the tackle, you know if you go full steam in rugby league without any laterla balance it can go wrong. He was trying to make a play for his team and it didn't work, happens in every second game.

Similarly Papalii copped a shoulder to the face and the ref / video ref called play on and you can rest assured if that was papaliis shoulder to someone elses face 9 times out ten in the same circumstances a penalty is given.

Great win by your boys, you fans should be proud. That is the kind of win that can really galvanise a struggling team and your troops are all due back soon. I've got to say though, Kris has done a pretty good job for you guys at fullback but strange you guys went in to the season with no back up FB. Hope you guys keep Wighton too because without him, your team really lacks any x factor.

Brotherdu · Apr 11, 2023

So, this isn't meant to be a conspiratorial thread, however it did get me thinking on some of the strange decisions we have copped over the years, not just 'Ref missed a blatant forward pass'.' Some examples -

The Billy Slater knock on when attempting to put a kick into the in goal, which the TMO then somehow concocted the excuse of an attempted drop goal.
Matt Gillet getting sin binned for tackling a player after running 30m back onside from a quick tap (if my recollection is correct)
Most recently, Toupau getting penalised for an accidental collision, whereas there was an argument for us receiving a try and tying the game.

So the question I am posing is, what other examples of perceived bias against the Broncos can you recall, and can you think of any examples of other teams being getting bizarre decisions against them?

A good example would be the Cowboys being robbed a few years back and losing a final when the Sharks (I think) were awarded a try on the 7th tackle.

Looking forward to hearing what other examples those with footy encyclopedia brains can come up with.

PS, obviously we can raise the fact that we always seem to play a high percentage of the top 8 teams twice a season, or the fact we can never seem to get a charge dropped or downgraded. I'm particularly interested in some of the weird and wacky on field decisions you've seen, regardless of the teams affected.

Cheers.

Gaz · Apr 11, 2023

The Dolphins.

Skathen · Apr 11, 2023