2022 R16 Sun - St Geo Illa 12-10 Canberra @ WIN

[skeepe]

Lol, that would have been Tapine’s quickest play the ball for the match.

Thanks, you highlight an important point. Joseph Tapine consistently earns the right to a quick play the ball, but by and large the defence never gives it to him and are almost never penalised for it. It's really tiresome how picked on we are.

 

[Generalzod]

Thanks, you highlight an important point. Joseph Tapine consistently earns the right to a quick play the ball, but by and large the defence never gives it to him and are almost never penalised for it. It's really tiresome how picked on we are.

Do you honestly think that the Raiders is the only club that is picked on?

 

[GongPanther]

I believe it has been reported that there is a clause allowing him to leave if a 1st grade gig he wants becomes available...

IMO, if he hangs firm for another 5 years, this team is his.

 

[skeepe]

IMO, if he hangs firm for another 5 years, this team is his.

Garth Brennan mk II

 

[GongPanther]

I am only here for the Skeepe meltdown.

Greatest ruling since last Friday.

 

[GongPanther]

It’s a penalty and 10 in the bin for a deliberate hold down. Not 6 again.

Then Ben Hunt was next to the play the ball, again cynical, again a penalty and 10 in the bin.

It is unforgivable not to call at least one of them.

MRC will be interesting.

 

[GongPanther]

Ref determining another outcome.

Generally they do.

 

[Incorrect]

IMO, if he hangs firm for another 5 years, this team is his.

Lol

Think John Howard said something similar to Peter Costello back in the day...that didn't work out too well for Pete!!!

 

[GongPanther]

This f**king 6 again rule.... I've been asking about the exact scenario we just saw since it was introduced.... And that is, if a team is down by 2 in the dying seconds of a game and are attacking, how does the ref decide if an infringement should be a penalty or 6 again? Head high infringement is a penalty...but we just saw the ref decide a different infringement was a 6 again instead and basically cost the Raiders the game...

Completely f**ked way for the Raiders to lose that game....

But it is a bad rule only when it goes against your side. To most people, I think it keeps the game flowing along, which was the reasoning behind bringing that rule in.

 

[GongPanther]

I don't use this forum anymore but I came on here to see how Skeepe was taking it.

I've gotta agree with poor skeepe on that ruling, but this gave me a belly laugh.

 

[Canard]

But it is a bad rule only when it goes against your side. To most people, I think it keeps the game flowing along, which was the reasoning behind bringing that rule in.

I think it's a great rule, and negative clubs like the Roosters have struggled since its introduction.

Yesterday's decision by the ref was a f**k up, pure and simple. It should have been a penalty.

 

[THE CHAMP]

id piss myself laughing with the referee calling out


15th & last .....

The first team to receive a call like that would be the roosters for sure

 

[Frailty]

I think it's a great rule, and negative clubs like the Roosters have struggled since its introduction.

Yesterday's decision by the ref was a f**k up, pure and simple. It should have been a penalty.

Definitely has absolutely nothing to do with losing one of the best halfbacks in recent history, as well as quality players like Morris, Cordner, Mitchell, since their 2019 GF team.

The rule is ridiculous. The justification that the same infringement in the 79th minute should have a different outcome from the one committed in the 35th minute is just dumb.

 

[Stinkfinger]

This f**king 6 again rule.... I've been asking about the exact scenario we just saw since it was introduced.... And that is, if a team is down by 2 in the dying seconds of a game and are attacking, how does the ref decide if an infringement should be a penalty or 6 again? Head high infringement is a penalty...but we just saw the ref decide a different infringement was a 6 again instead and basically cost the Raiders the game...

Completely f**ked way for the Raiders to lose that game....

Holding down in the ruck is a six again. The Dragons exploited the loophole that a six again is worthless in the last 15 seconds of the game. The Raiders had every chance to win this game and I'm not sure the ref should be doing them favours at the death.

 

[Bazal]

Holding down in the ruck is a six again.

Unless it's a professional foul...

That's what's missed in all this discourse. The referee has always had the discretion to penalise any play that constitutes a professional foul appropriately.

It doesn't need a rule change or a direction from Annesley or whatever. It just needs the refs to have the tiniest bit of feel for the game, which none of them seem to.

 

[Pete Cash]

Lol, that would have been Tapine’s quickest play the ball for the match.

Mate isn't tapine embarrassing you enough lately. What did he get against your lot ? Over 200m wasn't it lol

 

[Pete Cash]

I think there should just be a little ref discretion going on. The reason why they changed the rules to a penalty inside the 40m is because coaches gamed it. Good teams were sprinting off the line on tackle 1 or 2 and smashing the ball runner knowing even if they conceded a set restart the attacking side had zero momentum.

I think if Tapine just drops the ball as he's getting to his feet he probably wins a penalty but isn't that silly ? Hunt came in so late it was deliberate.

I don't like seeing players gaming the rules in such an obvious way.

 

[Still Nutty]

I think there should just be a little ref discretion going on. The reason why they changed the rules to a penalty inside the 40m is because coaches gamed it. Good teams were sprinting off the line on tackle 1 or 2 and smashing the ball runner knowing even if they conceded a set restart the attacking side had zero momentum.

I think if Tapine just drops the ball as he's getting to his feet he probably wins a penalty but isn't that silly ? Hunt came in so late it was deliberate.

I don't like seeing players gaming the rules in such an obvious way.

That's where the penalty and 'professional foul' should have been applied - he was on the ground and effectively held for nearly 3 seconds before Hunt came in from over the back and actively delayed the play further.

There were a couple of other howlers in that game that just smack of inconsistency as well... the 2 offside 'non-penalties' that weren't given for knock-ons by the Dragons and then pick up by a player in an offside position. Particularly the one picked up by Ravalawa off the dropped kick inside the Dragons 20 metres in the last 10 minutes of the game - opportunity for penalty to square up the game removed by Gough.

And it may not have stood out as much except for the fact that in the same game, Gough blew 2 penalties against the Raiders for doing exactly the same thing...maybe they NRL integrity Unit needs to check Peter Gough's footy tab account

 

[St Tangles]

It was also a professional foul by Hunt

Match Highlights: Dragons v Raiders

The St George Illawarra Dragons host the Canberra Raiders during Round 16 of the 2022 NRL Telstra Premiership

www.nrl.com

Go here and watch from 2:54

Hunt runs from 3m away to flop on Tapine who is already tackled and in the act of trying to get up. 5m out from the try line, potential try scoring situation with the Raiders having a 6 on 2 overlap on the right.

3 seconds left in the game and the ref calls 6 again. SIX AGAIN with 3 seconds left.

lol what a total piss take

Blame the rule
Ref got it spot on

 

[ColdWetPanther]

I think it's a great rule, and negative clubs like the Roosters have struggled since its introduction.

Yesterday's decision by the ref was a f**k up, pure and simple. It should have been a penalty.

Agree with this. The reason why teams like Canberra and the Roosters have more penalties and six agains against them is they are less disciplined at best, cynically coached at worst.

But yesterday should have been a penalty to Canberra.