Opinion Is Ricky Stuart the most overrated coach ever?

[blaza88z]

there's no doubt he was referencing the referees, you don't walk into a press conference and state that it's best for all if I don't answer questions because your team can't attract good players, even if that is what he believes you don't get fined for that

 

[Penrose Warrior]

there's no doubt he was referencing the referees, you don't walk into a press conference and state that it's best for all if I don't answer questions because your team can't attract good players, even if that is what he believes you don't get fined for that

I think we all worked that out in fairness.

If he was hoping to cop a better deal from the refs as a result I think he's in for a bad time.

If I was a ref, and I saw him react that way to a seemingly straight up and down game, I wouldn't be racing out to favour Canberra. The refs get shit every week (often justified) and I'm sure messers Sutton and Badger didn't take too kindly to Sticky's insinuation that they got things wrong and were in Brisbane's pocket.

More proof that he is a mong.

 

[Incorrect]

That David Riccio character from the Tele mentioned on the Footy Show yesterday morning that he had spoken to Sticky and Sticky told him Saturday nights performance in his presser was a culmination of several weeks of perceived rough deals by the refs against his team... one in particular the week before V the Dogs...something about the refs missing some call that allowed the dogs to go down and kick that winning field goal....

But you know... if you're giving up 34 points by the 79th minute and the opposition kicks a field goal and then a streaky try off a short kick off then it might not just be some rough referee calls that saw you concede that many points...

I'm not sure but I don't recall the Raiders being completely hard done by over the last month or so... Sticky's reasoning reminds me of that time back in 2013 (I think it was 2013, might have been 2012) when Steve Price was still coaching the Dragons and after they had just had a win and ended a run of bad form, he made some really bizarre and cryptic references about mis-treatment from certain sections of the media in the weeks prior. When he was pressed to elaborate he basically couldn't. It was like even he couldn't buy his own BS in an attempt to deflect any blame for poor results away from himself or his team... Sticky is one of the best deflectors EVER!!

 

[Newcastlerabbit]

A very uncanny resemblance between Ricky and Phil Rothfield. Maybe they're twins.

Gold.

 

[--Storm--]

Only rough call I can remember in the dogs game is a forward pass called against Josh Reynolds that would have turned 26-0 into 30-0 with a conversion to come

 

[undertaker]

Gold.

Even the wrinkles on their foreheads match

 

[skeepe]

Only rough call I can remember in the dogs game is a forward pass called against Josh Reynolds that would have turned 26-0 into 30-0 with a conversion to come

That's because you're an idiot with an axe to grind.

Pritchard was offside when he regathered the ball for the first try - ball bounced off Lichaa, who was behind him.

Then there was the mysterious "stripping" incidents where the Dogs were able to knock on and still be awarded a try, and then later strip the ball in an identical situation, have it called a knock on against the Raiders and score a try. Now if they were consistent, they would either both be strips, or both be knock ons.

I can understand Ricky's frustration, even if I don't agree with his way of showing it.

The two games prior to this one, the NRL has apologised for incorrect calls that directly cost us on the scoreboard, those being the absolutely disgraceful double movement call against Croker in Wollongong that completely changed the game, and the non-call of a blatant strip by the Bulldogs that temporarily halted the momentum we had built up. And what's the bet they apologise for a couple of howlers in this game too, Reed's absolutely blatant strip on Kennedy that was called a knock on while we were hot on attack the prime candidate?

On their own, none of these decisions cost us games, we had plenty of chances to take them and weren't good enough to do so. But absolute howlers week after week - it's not like they were 50/50 calls - everyone has their limits, and we've seen Stuart's. Now the club as a whole needs to refocus, put it behind them and worry about smashing the most vile club in the NRL this weekend.

 

[Ronnie Dobbs]

That's because you're an idiot with an axe to grind.

Pritchard was offside when he regathered the ball for the first try - ball bounced off Lichaa, who was behind him.

Then there was the mysterious "stripping" incidents where the Dogs were able to knock on and still be awarded a try, and then later strip the ball in an identical situation, have it called a knock on against the Raiders and score a try. Now if they were consistent, they would either both be strips, or both be knock ons.

I can understand Ricky's frustration, even if I don't agree with his way of showing it.

The two games prior to this one, the NRL has apologised for incorrect calls that directly cost us on the scoreboard, those being the absolutely disgraceful double movement call against Croker in Wollongong that completely changed the game, and the non-call of a blatant strip by the Bulldogs that temporarily halted the momentum we had built up. And what's the bet they apologise for a couple of howlers in this game too, Reed's absolutely blatant strip on Kennedy that was called a knock on while we were hot on attack the prime candidate?

On their own, none of these decisions cost us games, we had plenty of chances to take them and weren't good enough to do so. But absolute howlers week after week - it's not like they were 50/50 calls - everyone has their limits, and we've seen Stuart's. Now the club as a whole needs to refocus, put it behind them and worry about smashing the most vile club in the NRL this weekend.

The refs might suck, but they are nowhere near as bad at their jobs as Canberra's coach.

 

[Snappy]

I can understand Ricky's frustration, even if I don't agree with his way of showing it.
.

lol

The irony

 

[nick87]

those being the absolutely disgraceful double movement call against Croker in Wollongong that completely changed the game

Didnt Archer back that decision? Im sure that he did.

 

[ek999]

Didnt Archer back that decision? Im sure that he did.

He did because it was the right call

 

[nick87]

He did because it was the right call

As ive said before on this, i've got no problem with the no try call. What i dont understand is why anywhere else on the field, if they felt the tackle was completed, they send the player back to the spot and ask him the play the ball, yet here it's a penalty.

It wasnt as if this was a classic case of double movement, where bodies are all over him and he makes a clear second effort with his arm with merkins all over him. A player skipped over the top of him, he felt entitled to go on, referee didn't actually call held... so why if you feel it's not a try, cant we send him back to the mark and make him play the ball? Also if that happens 10 metres off our own line, there is absolute zero chance it's not play on.

Some of our rules are just f**king ridiculous and fly in the face of logic. That was either a try, or it was held at the spot and he goes back to play the ball. That in itself is a 50/50 call and ive got no issue if they came back and said No Try, play the ball.

/rant

 

[Mr. Snrub]

As ive said before on this, i've got no problem with the no try call. What i dont understand is why anywhere else on the field, if they felt the tackle was completed, they send the player back to the spot and ask him the play the ball, yet here it's a penalty.

It wasn't as if this was a classic case of double movement, where bodies are all over him and he makes a clear second effort with his arm with merkins all over him. A player skipped over the top of him, he felt entitled to go on, referee didn't actually call held... so why if you feel it's not a try, cant we send him back to the mark and make him play the ball? Also if that happens 10 metres off our own line, there is absolute zero chance it's not play on.

Some of our rules are just f**king ridiculous and fly in the face of logic. That was either a try, or it was held at the spot and he goes back to play the ball. That in itself is a 50/50 call and ive got no issue if they came back and said No Try, play the ball.

/rant

I was watching Game 1 of last year's State of Origin series and the try that Hayne scores, is pretty much the same scenario as Croker's no try. Ridiculous double standards. I'm not one to be a biased Raiders supporter, but if the try Croker scored was scored by a player like Hayne or Inglis, would they have awarded the try? See the comparison below:

Hayne try: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9e8Fz2J-7Q&t=2m26s
Croker no try: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97kjok1yLso&t=0m26s

 

[gUt]

I guess with the Croker one the refs interpreted that because he was on the ground and a defender touched him it's an automatic tackle, but I agree that it was harsh to blow it up as a penalty.

 

[bottle]

Didnt Archer back that decision? Im sure that he did.

Facts aren't that important when skeepe is ranting.
'completely changed the game'. fmd, if a team can't recover from a refs error in the first few minutes of a game then they are mentally fragile and not up NRL standard quite frankly. Put that down to the coach peeps.
They were outplayed on the day. Simple really, unless you're constantly looking for excuses, like Sticky, and skeepe.

 

[bottle]

I was watching Game 1 of last year's State of Origin series and the try that Hayne scores, is pretty much the same scenario as Croker's no try. Ridiculous double standards. I'm not one to be a biased Raiders supporter, but if the try Croker scored was scored by a player like Hayne or Inglis, would they have awarded the try? See the comparison below:

Hayne try: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9e8Fz2J-7Q&t=2m26s
Croker no try: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97kjok1yLso&t=0m26s

If you are truly as balanced as you claim to be, and provided you understand what defines a tackle, the differences in the two should be obvious to you.

Hayne broke the tackle and at the time that he scored the arm carrying the ball had not come into contact with the ground until he placed it over the tryline.
Croker had the ball carrying arm on the ground when Frizell had hands on him. Technically a tackle. Split second stuff and I thought we were lucky to get the call on the day, but technically correct. Hardly a game breaker that early in the piece though.

None of this negates the fact that Sticky is a massive sook.

 

[Mr. Snrub]

If you are truly as balanced as you claim to be, and provided you understand what defines a tackle, the differences in the two should be obvious to you.

Hayne broke the tackle and at the time that he scored the arm carrying the ball had not come into contact with the ground until he placed it over the tryline.
Croker had the ball carrying arm on the ground when Frizell had hands on him. Technically a tackle. Split second stuff and I thought we were lucky to get the call on the day, but technically correct. Hardly a game breaker that early in the piece though.

None of this negates the fact that Sticky is a massive sook.

Fair point, I still think it's touch and go personally. Hayne's arm did come pretty close to touching the ground. I don't really mind though, as I'm a NSW supported haha. I never said that it was a game breaker. Dragons were clearly the better side that, I just thought it should have been awarded a try.

I think that Ricky is just very passionate about the Raiders. Yes, he acted out of sorts in the post match conference but isn't it good to see a coach so passionate about his team? Of course, Broncos deserved to win, but the last few weeks Raiders have had some dud calls go against them. So for Ricky, it was a build up of those dud calls that have made him so frustrated.

 

[nick87]

I guess with the Croker one the refs interpreted that because he was on the ground and a defender touched him it's an automatic tackle, but I agree that it was harsh to blow it up as a penalty.

Here's the really annoying part part, if that's how the officials saw it at the time, why didnt the referee call held? He didn't call held, which played into Croker's mentality to continue on. Had he called held, he'd have simply sent him back to the spot.

So then the video ref over rules him but because the referee screwed up by not calling held, we are then penalised for it. So we lose possession because the referee didnt do his job properly and the video ref is not afforded the chance to correct his mistake, under the rules he can only call TRY or Penalty. It's pretty f**king ridiculous. Again, if they wanted to say no try and play the ball at the spot, i wouldnt have a problem.

 

[bottle]

Fair point, I still think it's touch and go personally. Hayne's arm did come pretty close to touching the ground. I don't really mind though, as I'm a NSW supported haha. I never said that it was a game breaker. Dragons were clearly the better side that, I just thought it should have been awarded a try.

I think that Ricky is just very passionate about the Raiders. Yes, he acted out of sorts in the post match conference but isn't it good to see a coach so passionate about his team? Of course, Broncos deserved to win, but the last few weeks Raiders have had some dud calls go against them. So for Ricky, it was a build up of those dud calls that have made him so frustrated.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you did. That was in response to something else.

 

[redvscotty]

Second effort at the line. Clear penalty.