Match Discussion: Round 9 vs St Geo Illa @ Suncorp Stadium, Milton / Yuggera-Turrbal

[League Unlimited News]

NRL 2025 - Round 9
Wests Tigers v St George Illawarra Dragons
Suncorp Stadium, Milton / Yuggera-Turrbal (TICKETS)

Saturday 3 May 2025
NRL kickoff 7:45pm.
Live on Fox, Kayo

1. Jahream Bula 2. Sunia Turuva 3. Adam Doueihi 4. Starford To'a 5. Brent Naden 6. Lachlan Galvin 7. Jarome Luai 8. Terrell May 9. Apisai Koroisau 10. Fonua Pole 11. Samuela Fainu 12. Alex Seyfarth 13. Alex Twal
14. Tallyn Da Silva 15. Royce Hunt 16. Jack Bird 17. Sione Fainu
18. Tony Sukkar 19. Heath Mason 20. Kit Laulilii 21. Solomona Faataape 22. Tristan Hope

Unchanged

1. Clinton Gutherson 2. Tyrell Sloan 3. Moses Suli 4. Valentine Holmes 5. Corey Allan 6. Kyle Flanagan 7. Lyhkan King-Togia 8. Toby Couchman 9. Damien Cook 10. David Klemmer 11. Dylan Egan 12. Jaydn Su'A 13. Hamish Stewart
14. Jacob Liddle 15. Jack de Belin 16. Emre Guler 17. Luciano Leilua
18. Loko Jnr Pasifiki Tonga 19. Nathan Lawson 20. Blake Lawrie 21. Lachlan Ilias 22. Raymond Faitala-Mariner

Out: Sione Finau (wing), Lachlan Ilias, Blake Lawrie (to reserve)
In: Corey Allan (wing), Lyhkan King-Togia (halfback), Hamish Stewart (lock)
Changes: Jack De Belin (lock to bench)

Referee: Wyatt Raymond
Sideline Officials: Drew Oultram, Matt Noyen
Video Referee: Kasey Badger

HEAD TO HEAD - 2000 - 2024​

	TOTAL	WESTS TIGERS	ST GEO ILLA	DRAWN
ALL MATCHES	46	21	25	0
SUNCORP	1	1	0	0

LAST FIVE MEETINGS​

YEAR	ROUND	RESULT	VENUE	CROWD
2022	Round 24	ST GEO ILLA 24-22	CommBank	9789
2023	Round 10	WESTS TIGERS 18-16	Suncorp	46835
2023	Round 21	ST GEO ILLA 18-14	WIN	7246
2024	Round 6	ST GEO ILLA 24-12	Campbelltown	17141
2024	Round 14	ST GEO ILLA 56-14	WIN	9969

BIGGEST WINS​

YEAR	ROUND	RESULT	VENUE	CROWD
2004	Round 15	ST GEO ILLA 50-0	Oki Jubilee	16915
2019	Round 24	WESTS TIGERS 42-14	SCG	9136

NEXT FOUR MATCHES​

	Round 10	Round 11	Round 13	Round 14
WESTS TIGERS	MELBOURNE (A)	SOUTH SYDNEY (H)	NORTH QLD (A)	PENRITH (H)
ST GEO ILLA	WARRIORS (H)	BRISBANE (A)	NEWCASTLE (H)	DOLPHINS (A)

LAST THREE MATCHES​

	Round 6		Round 7		Round 8
WESTS TIGERS	NEWCASTLE	W 20-4	PARRAMATTA	L 22-38	CRONULLA	W 20-18
ST GEO ILLA	GOLD COAST	W 38-16	MANLY	W 20-18	SYDNEY	L 18-46

STATE OF PLAY: 2025 SEASON​

	POSITION	PLAYED	BYES	W-L-D	FOR	AGAINST
WESTS TIGERS	9th	8	0	4-4-0	180	166
ST GEO ILLA	10th	7	1	3-4-0	156	164

 

[Tigerm]

 

[Tigerm]

Never heard of either of them.

 

[Benchtiger]

It would be nice to put two wins in roar on the board, but life is never easy being a Tiger supporter.

 

[Perth Tiger]

Never heard of either of them.

So long as it is not a repeat of the Tim Smith debut

 

[Vic Mackey]

Never heard of either of them.

Damn, Illias sucks so much. I think theyll play LKT at 6 and Flanno 7. He played a couple of games last year, didnt do much but still only 19. Big 5/8 who runs a lot.

Glovers a journeyman 7, think hes like 27. Standard ok nsw cup half.

Neither should rind alarm bells. Gutherson and their edges are where their attack comes from.

 

[League Unlimited News]

1. Jahream Bula 2. Sunia Turuva 3. Adam Doueihi 4. Starford To'a 5. Brent Naden 6. Lachlan Galvin 7. Jarome Luai 8. Terrell May 9. Apisai Koroisau 10. Fonua Pole 11. Samuela Fainu 12. Alex Seyfarth 13. Alex Twal

14. Tallyn Da Silva 15. Royce Hunt 16. Jack Bird 17. Sione Fainu

18. Tony Sukkar 19. Heath Mason 20. Kit Laulilii 21. Solomona Faataape 22. Tristan Hope

Changes: nine

NRL TEAMS - 2025 Round 9 (Magic Round) » League Unlimited

leagueunlimited.com

 

[Tigerm]

Team List:
1. Jahream Bula - sponsored by Sensory Gardens Australia
2. Sunia Turuva - sponsored by Ellis Consolidated
3. Adam Doueihi - sponsored by Murray Kennedy Real Estate
4. Starford To'a - sponsored by Z Wealth Group
5. Brent Naden - sponsored by Exclusive Estate Agents
6. Lachlan Galvin - sponsored by Retro Air
7. Jarome Luai (c) - sponsored by APN Compounding
8. Terrell May - sponsored by Z Realty Group
9. Api Koroisau (c) - sponsored by KwikFlo
10. Fonua Pole - sponsored by Club Menangle
11. Samuela Fainu - sponsored by Mars Forklifts
12. Alex Seyfarth - sponsored by Ultra Building Works
13. Alex Twal - sponsored by Endacom
Interchange:
14. Tallyn Da Silva - sponsored by One World Courier
15. Royce Hunt - sponsored by Shane’s Waterproofing
16. Jack Bird - sponsored by MJS Electrical Products & Supplies
17. Sione Fainu - sponsored by Workplace Law
Reserves:
18. Tony Sukkar - sponsored by Wests Tigers Empower
19. Heath Mason - sponsored by Wests Tigers Empower
20. Kit Laulilii - sponsored by Wests Tigers Empower
21. Solomona Faataape - sponsored by Wests Tigers Empower
22. Tristan Hope - sponsored by Wests Tigers Empower
Coach: Benji Marshall - sponsored by Pepper Money

Team List: NRL Round 9 vs Dragons

Wests Tigers Head Coach Benji Marshall has named a 22-man squad to face the Dragons at Magic Round this Saturday night.

www.weststigers.com.au

-----------------
Stability of the team is a great strength.

Us by 12 with Turuva MoM with 3 tries.

 

[BrotherJim05]

I have such a strong feeling we are going to smash the Dragons at Magic Round. We will all be on such a massive high from it that we will dare to believe we will beat the Storm the following week, only to get our asses handed to us and the media pulling up stats that we can't win 3 games in a row. Then Chammas to start "reporting" that Bula isn't happy at Concord but it has nothing to do with Isaac Moses

 

[Vic Mackey]

I’ll be disappointed if we don’t win this. That dragons team is very average on paper. I think only 3 or 4 of them make our starting 13. They do have some good attacking structure in the 20 but if we limit errors and penalties they won’t get down there. Our middles shit on theirs.

The good guys by 14.

 

[TheDefinitionOfMadness]

My concern this week is the stats the NRL released to all and sundry showing we're the 3rd highest team when it comes to high tackles. I think this will play into the unconscious bias the refs / bunker have when making their decisions.

If we play like last week though I reckon we can overcome this and have a good win. The dragons will have a 20 minute poor period in the game and we need to take full advantage of that.

 

[Tigerm]

This week:
7- Sharks (8pts) V Eels
8- Manly (8) Bye
9- WT's (8) V Drags
10- Drags (8)
11- Bunnies (8) V Knights

 

[Nutz]

My concern this week is the stats the NRL released to all and sundry showing we're the 3rd highest team when it comes to high tackles. I think this will play into the unconscious bias the refs/bunker have when making their decisions.

If we play like last week though I reckon we can overcome this and have a good win. The dragons will have a 20-minute poor period in the game and we need to take full advantage of that.

Putting an ex-footballer cap on.
I can say that by flattening your head and body angle ( leaning forward) prior to contact, you're just as likely to get hit in the head.
Most attackers these days run more upright so they can tie up 3 defenders. Also it makes it easier to offload, swerve or sidestep step... but this gives tacklers more area of the body to target.
By leaning forward you will get head contact. It seems a contradiction of terms I know.
If Marty Lang played footy now, I suspect he wouldn't have as many head knocks, not deliberate ones.
As the clampdown and scrutiny of head contact continues, I hope accidental contact is further considered with little or no punishment.
I know the NRL are gun-shy because of legal action but a crime needs to have intent or recklessness to get a conviction.

How does boxing and the MMA get around all this?

 

[WA Tiger]

Putting an ex-footballer cap on.
I can say that by flattening your head and body angle ( leaning forward) prior to contact, you're just as likely to get hit in the head.
Most attackers these days run more upright so they can tie up 3 defenders. Also it makes it easier to offload, swerve or sidestep step... but this gives tacklers more area of the body to target.
By leaning forward you will get head contact. It seems a contradiction of terms I know.
If Marty Lang played footy now, I suspect he wouldn't have as many head knocks, not deliberate ones.
As the clampdown and scrutiny of head contact continues, I hope accidental contact is further considered with little or no punishment.
I know the NRL are gun-shy because of legal action but a crime needs to have intent or recklessness to get a conviction.

How does boxing and the MMA get around all this?

I don’t think leaning forward when running with the ball is an issue with the current clampdown.. Like when your driving on the road you have a car crash for a reason 1/ Driving too fast 2/Driving too close 3/ short fuse. In that sense it’s an accident waiting to happen..not really and accident as such
For the league equivalent stay right away from what might cause concussion, and 9/10 you’ll be fine.. go near them and you’re asking for trouble..
The words intent, not malicious and accident are irrelevant. Lazyness is more applicable

 

[TheDefinitionOfMadness]

Putting an ex-footballer cap on.
I can say that by flattening your head and body angle ( leaning forward) prior to contact, you're just as likely to get hit in the head.
Most attackers these days run more upright so they can tie up 3 defenders. Also it makes it easier to offload, swerve or sidestep step... but this gives tacklers more area of the body to target.
By leaning forward you will get head contact. It seems a contradiction of terms I know.
If Marty Lang played footy now, I suspect he wouldn't have as many head knocks, not deliberate ones.
As the clampdown and scrutiny of head contact continues, I hope accidental contact is further considered with little or no punishment.
I know the NRL are gun-shy because of legal action but a crime needs to have intent or recklessness to get a conviction.

How does boxing and the MMA get around all this?

They can operate because in their sport the object of the game is knock your opponent out. There's no if, ands, or buts. An attack on the opponents' head is the objective. Body contact sports are different with different objectives, and impact to the head (accidental or deliberate) is illegal.

Boxing also has 1 month ban on training / fighting after a knockout for the first time, and then 3 months for every other time.

 

[TheDefinitionOfMadness]

I don’t think leaning forward when running with the ball is an issue with the current clampdown.. Like when your driving on the road you have a car crash for a reason 1/ Driving too fast 2/Driving too close 3/ short fuse. In that sense it’s an accident waiting to happen..not really and accident as such
For the league equivalent stay right away from what might cause concussion, and 9/10 you’ll be fine.. go near them and you’re asking for trouble..
The words intent, not malicious and accident are irrelevant. Lazyness is more applicable

I think tackling technique has a lot to do with it. Although I disagree with Paul Kent about many things, I think his take on the concussion issue is pretty good.

Players are coached these days to tackle over the top of the ball, which the coaches have identified as the best way to stop the ball runner and stop an offload. This technique is probably what's causing most of the high tackles as unless you get it just about perfect you slip off the top of the ball into the head and neck are. Or if you get it very wrong straight into the head. This style also leaves no margin for error if the ball runner slips, changes their heigh, or is tackled by another player first and that changes their height.

So what needs to happen to change this is longer suspensions, rather than knee jerk sin-bins. If a large amount of players are out suspended for a longer time coaches will change how they coach tackling technique. If it's not forced upon them, they won't change.

So basically he's saying unless coaches are incentivised to change they won't, which is true IMO. The longer suspensions will act as the incentive the coaches need to change.

I reckon this would have a massively positive effect as there'd be lower tackling and more chance of off-loads. More exciting footy.

In my own opinion, I also think high tackles have been increasing at a small but steady rate since the introduction of the interchange. Back in the day a forward couldn't get as big as humanly (or unhamanly) possible because they knew they had to manage their body through 80 minutes of footy. Since the interchange has come and it's use has been refined, the endurance factor has been eroded to a large extent. Aside from the interchange there's also many long breaks because of player injury (real or fake) and the intervention of the bunker. This has allowed players to bulk up as much as they can, be able to play 40 minutes (or sometimes way less) and still be able to play the game.

Bigger bodies mean bigger hits and when things go wrong, bigger injuries. Having said that, I'm not sure what the answer is. I know there's no chance of going back to the replacement rule, although I think that would be best.

 

[Nutz]

They can operate because in their sport the object of the game is knock your opponent out. There's no if, ands, or buts. An attack on the opponents' head is the objective. Body contact sports are different with different objectives, and impact to the head (accidental or deliberate) is illegal.

Boxing also has 1 month ban on training / fighting after a knockout for the first time, and then 3 months for every other time.

Cheers for that Dom. Makes sense I guess regarding boxing.
I still can't see how an accident is illegal though. That's a strong word DOM.
In an NRL sense, accidents still come with a penalty but I was referring to a civil case.
I can't see how a judge could find someone guilty of manslaughter if a player lost his footing and fell into a knee.
I'd be interested if this has happened before.

 

[WA Tiger]

I think tackling technique has a lot to do with it. Although I disagree with Paul Kent about many things, I think his take on the concussion issue is pretty good.

Players are coached these days to tackle over the top of the ball, which the coaches have identified as the best way to stop the ball runner and stop an offload. This technique is probably what's causing most of the high tackles as unless you get it just about perfect you slip off the top of the ball into the head and neck are. Or if you get it very wrong straight into the head. This style also leaves no margin for error if the ball runner slips, changes their heigh, or is tackled by another player first and that changes their height.

So what needs to happen to change this is longer suspensions, rather than knee jerk sin-bins. If a large amount of players are out suspended for a longer time coaches will change how they coach tackling technique. If it's not forced upon them, they won't change.

So basically he's saying unless coaches are incentivised to change they won't, which is true IMO. The longer suspensions will act as the incentive the coaches need to change.

I reckon this would have a massively positive effect as there'd be lower tackling and more chance of off-loads. More exciting footy.

In my own opinion, I also think high tackles have been increasing at a small but steady rate since the introduction of the interchange. Back in the day a forward couldn't get as big as humanly (or unhamanly) possible because they knew they had to manage their body through 80 minutes of footy. Since the interchange has come and it's use has been refined, the endurance factor has been eroded to a large extent. Aside from the interchange there's also many long breaks because of player injury (real or fake) and the intervention of the bunker. This has allowed players to bulk up as much as they can, be able to play 40 minutes (or sometimes way less) and still be able to play the game.

Bigger bodies mean bigger hits and when things go wrong, bigger injuries. Having said that, I'm not sure what the answer is. I know there's no chance of going back to the replacement rule, although I think that would be best.

Kent’s always been strong on the increased punishment. And he’s spot on.. The problem is the league they are too scared to implement and stick..Cos there’s an uproar from every expert coming out of the woodwork.. Just a question how much league background do Vlandys and his side kick have.. I’m guessing not much with how much they are influenced by the ex players protests when they go hard on punishment so they back off... as I mentioned before this crackdown is only because they were criticised for not sin binning a player then suspending that player after the game..(there was nothing wrong with that but it’s lead to this)
Although I’ve noticed there’s been no broken ankles lately..

 

[TheDefinitionOfMadness]

If a player ever sues the NRL over a CTE related disease / condition it won't come down to 1 incident. They'll make an argument that the NRL didn't do enough to stop concussions from happening. I can't see these cases coming up for some time but you never know. The AFL are already dealing with their 1st one. It doesn't even have to be an effected player who takes legal action. Their family can do it.

I think the NRL have done a pretty good job in getting players into the HIA as it's needed, and if they're failing, making them stand down for 11 days. They're doing a good job of ensuring a concussion doesn't turn into a catastrophic brain injury later in the same game or a week later. What they've done so far, fails at address repeated head knocks over a long period of time, like a player's whole career. To a court, whether it's accidental or deliberate won't make a bit of difference. They'll only look at what the NRL have done to minimise head contact, which to date is nothing.

Look at Mario Fenech. He's in a nursing home with dementia. Spud Carroll is already showing signs. There's no way to know if they're in that position due to an accidental head knock, a deliberate one, or heaps of them (both deliberate and accidental) over the period of their careers.

As an example, rugby union have the chest rule. If you hit in the chest or higher it's an automatic send off. And they enforce this rule (they did it in a world cup final) and continued to do it until the players fell into line. If anyone sues the ARU they can then go back and say "Well look what we implemented. A rule designed to eliminate head knocks as much as possible." They'll be sweet. What can the NRL say? We tried to sin bin a few people but everyone yelled at us so we folded like deck chairs.

 

[Nutz]

I think tackling technique has a lot to do with it. Although I disagree with Paul Kent about many things, I think his take on the concussion issue is pretty good.

Players are coached these days to tackle over the top of the ball, which the coaches have identified as the best way to stop the ball runner and stop an offload. This technique is probably what's causing most of the high tackles as unless you get it just about perfect you slip off the top of the ball into the head and neck are. Or if you get it very wrong straight into the head. This style also leaves no margin for error if the ball runner slips, changes their heigh, or is tackled by another player first and that changes their height.

So what needs to happen to change this is longer suspensions, rather than knee jerk sin-bins. If a large amount of players are out suspended for a longer time coaches will change how they coach tackling technique. If it's not forced upon them, they won't change.

So basically he's saying unless coaches are incentivised to change they won't, which is true IMO. The longer suspensions will act as the incentive the coaches need to change.

I reckon this would have a massively positive effect as there'd be lower tackling and more chance of off-loads. More exciting footy.

In my own opinion, I also think high tackles have been increasing at a small but steady rate since the introduction of the interchange. Back in the day a forward couldn't get as big as humanly (or unhamanly) possible because they knew they had to manage their body through 80 minutes of footy. Since the interchange has come and it's use has been refined, the endurance factor has been eroded to a large extent. Aside from the interchange there's also many long breaks because of player injury (real or fake) and the intervention of the bunker. This has allowed players to bulk up as much as they can, be able to play 40 minutes (or sometimes way less) and still be able to play the game.

Bigger bodies mean bigger hits and when things go wrong, bigger injuries. Having said that, I'm not sure what the answer is. I know there's no chance of going back to the replacement rule, although I think that would be best.

Some good points there nate. Has there been an increase in head knocks though or is it that the definitions and scrutiny has increased?
Unfortunately it happens, it's a contact sport.
Preventativemeasure is not going work all the time because if the defender lowers his target and the ball runner lowers his angle it's going to happen or if the ball runner loses his footing.
If there's no intent and it's not direct intentional force then a penalty should be sufficient.
It would be a brave judge to convict someone of manslaughter when there's no intent and it's an accident.
I don't cop that a defender is lazy either under certain circumstances like towards the end of game or extra time because he's is under fatigue. That could also be argued in court as mitigation.
Sometimes I think journalists have no idea how hard it is to play rugby league at NRL level.
Generally, I think these modern day athletes do a tremendous job.
That Curran tackle on Haas goes against everything I've said and should have been fined or suspended heavily.
If a player is rubbed out then the fine should be shared by the injured player and his club.