The hit on Creagh

[AJ_82]

Agree re dry weather footy - as I saw the rain tumble all day from my city office I knew it was going to be a bad night!

Sa's hit was high and in with the elbow cocked upwards, so I would at least hope he gets a couple of weeks.

As for Soward, I think it was wise to leave the side as was, and not worth risking Sowie with his back for this week if it was touch and go he could be gone for next week and beyond!

End of the day - we got outplayed and we just weren't up for it ... we just have to make sure we are for the next 4 weeks!

Finally ... despite losing Toyota cup, how good was the blow up and the Roosters bloke who hit his own team mate and then got sent off for it lol!

 

[Red Bear]

Hayne was awful last night wasnt he? Not particularly biased, just poor reffing. That should have been a penalty, some of the 6 agains tho were quite amusing.

 

[rufus youngblood]

Jokes aside, the Roosters were given a fair bit of latitude in the match.

The Sponge thinking that being captain entitled him to whinge more than ever, in between his constant illegal plays in the ruck area (eg foream in the face and the occasional cheap shot).

Btw, has O'Meley completing forgotten how to tackle a bloke facing him? Perhaps he thinks the kidneys is where a player keeps his brains nowadays.

But the actions of Bwaith and Co were not turning points, even Sa's hit on Creagh (as crucial as it was) should not have decided the match. The game was won by Easts defending better when it counted and putting together a better kick and chase game.

Nevertheless, Sa's hit on Creagh was illegal, initially intentional, and ultimately reckless. He should be charged.

Cmon willow, what latituse, fair dinkum you guys were constantly off-side, fitzgibbon scores a try and he doesnt even look at it, soliola smashes rogers on the 4th tackle and he gives you 6 again, rogers kicks the ball from perretts hands and he calls a knock on, gasneir loses the ball forward from a bomb mini gets tackled in goal and its a dropout.

Ist taht the latituse you are referring too???????????????

Sa had the intent to hit the ball carrier whom he thought was the decoy creagh, you should be happy the decoy play worked as sa fell for it.

ook i like Ben Creagh, wonderful player and i hope he is ok, but it wasnt a malicious hit with intent to take him out of the game.

Sa wont be cited, Omeley will be but he had his arm by his side and ryles was falling, what made it look worse than a love tap was that big cat laying on the ground to get the penalty, funny how when the penalty was awarded he got up, left the field for the free interchange and returned 10 mins later.

# players that should be cited are your 2 international centres for impersonating players who gave a sh*t and your 5/8 for impersonating a first grade footballer.

Lets not leave out supercaoch for not playing soward, the biggest mistake a coach could make when kicking was going to be the deciding factor.

 

[St_Bondi]

Creagh would only have been a decoy runner had a cut out pass been thrown past him to an outside player.

The ball never got past Rogers so Sa had no right at all to hit a player (outside the ball carrier) who was not carrying the ball. End of stroy.

Q. Will Sa get a week on the sidelines?
A. He should but I don't think he will.

As long as it's dry the Bronx will be the chickens by 16 ... at least.

 

[JT_]

It doesnt take much intelligence to understand that Creagh was ghosting the player with the ball and both sides were coming at each other with quite a bit of pace and its not like Sa could just pull out of Creagh's way as he was there with the intentions of getting a late ball.

Unfortunately Creagh wasn't seeing what was in front of him and wasn't prepared to take a hit and got poleaxed.

Sa ain't no grub hes a talent with great skills for a man of his stature so we will miss him if he gets suspended but hopefully not!

 

[Jasdragon]

Last time I saw a headclash it was just an accident. Seriously I see blokes taken off the ball (and lets face it Creagh was less than 1mtre from the ball carrier, he fell into the tackle) EVERY game ive ever watched.

If hed have offloaded to Creagh he may have scored, that big a bloke that close to the line. Sa wouldve looked a dill if that happened, so he hit on suspicion.

If you run DECOYS occasionally you get checked, its been in the game since about I dont know 1908.:crazy:

Man up gaylords.

:lol::lol:

You can't hit a player without the ball it's simple!

 

[Willow]

The stupid thing about it is that if it hadn't been such a big hit and the ball carrier (rogers?) went through it would have been checked for obstuction.

The obstruction thing again. I thought it was a bad joke. The amount of spin doctoring going on is funny to say the least.

How is it obstruction when Creagh is behind the ruck while Rogers is being locked up in a tackle?

Sa ran at Creagh, illegally hit him off the ball, and knocked him out. Rather than look for loopholes, why not simply call it for it what it was?

Yes it was a poor read by Sa in defence

Not a poor read at all, Sa knew exactly what he was doing.

but the Roosters have has 2 or 3 trys this year

Irrelevant to this incident.

 

[rufus youngblood]

You can't hit a player without the ball it's simple!

You cant win in the wet without a decent kicking game, simple!

You cannot win games without scoring points, simple!

Gaz was petrified of soliola, simple!

Ben rogers is a joke, simple!

Ryles, well he's just simple!

On the Sa tackle, tell me the last player suspended for tackling a player on suspicion???????????

Enjoy Olympic Park next week

Your supporters should be looking at that game than worrying about the roosters broncos game

 

[rufus youngblood]

The obstruction thing again. I thought it was a bad joke. The amount of spin doctoring going on is funny to say the least.

How is it obstruction when Creagh is behind the ruck while Rogers is being locked up in a tackle?

Sa ran at Creagh, illegally hit him off the ball, and knocked him out. Rather than look for loopholes, why not simply call it for it what it was?

Not a poor read at all, Sa knew exactly what he was doing.Irrelevant to this incident.

An accident is what it is

Why not talk about your captain for what he is - a cat

Why not talk about your coaches decision to leave soward out- stupidity

Why not talk about your forward pack - soft

Why not talk about the final score - 10-0

 

[MattYg1]

An accident is what it is

Why not talk about your captain for what he is - a cat

Why not talk about your coaches decision to leave soward out- stupidity

Why not talk about your forward pack - soft

Why not talk about the final score - 10-0

Actually our conversations about such topics are scattered all around the forum at various different times...

Feel free to have a look around!

 

[SuperSoward]

Mark O'meley = Fat Sh*t

 

[SuperSoward]

An accident is what it is

Why not talk about your captain for what he is - a cat

Why not talk about your coaches decision to leave soward out- stupidity

Why not talk about your forward pack - soft

Why not talk about the final score - 10-0

Why don't we talk about Sa not getting penalised? He is a cat!

 

[Willow]

Cmon willow, what latituse, fair dinkum

I was being fair dinkum, and if I cared more about it I'm sure I could go through the tape and find loads of incidents, but it would too off-topic and wouldn't resolve anything.

you guys were constantly off-side,

An emotional claim posted by a biased supporter.

How can a team be 'constantly' offiside?

Perhaps you should temper your words with facts instead of flights of fantasy.

fitzgibbon scores a try and he doesnt even look at it

He doesn't score a try until a referee awards it, so its not a try. Blame the ref for not checking with the video ref if you like. As we have seen, referees make mistakes.

FTR, I'm not blaming the referee for the loss.

soliola smashes rogers on the 4th tackle and he gives you 6 again

That's because Soliola was deemed to get an arm on the ball. Take off the blinkers... if you can.

rogers kicks the ball from perretts hands and he calls a knock on

LOL! There were knock-ons galore and you think you've found one that wasn't. Well done Sherlock.

gasneir loses the ball forward from a bomb mini gets tackled in goal and its a dropout.

See above.

You're sounding like a sore winner. But please don't stop. I like lists.

Ist taht the latituse you are referring too???????????????

I thought it was a typo the first time, but it seems that you're just lousy at spelling. Its spelled 'latitude'. If the word is causing you some grief, perhaps you should look it up.

Free tip:
www.dictionary.com

Sa had the intent to hit the ball carrier whom he thought was the decoy creagh, you should be happy the decoy play worked as sa fell for it.

Well at least you're back on topic.

As I posted earlier, I'm not buying the obstruction defence. Watch the tape again.

ook i like Ben Creagh, wonderful player and i hope he is ok, but it wasnt a malicious hit with intent to take him out of the game.

It was an attempt to take out a player behind play, and he succeeded. It was an illegal tackle. That much we know.

Sa wont be cited

I don't know if he'll be cited. I'm saying he should be.

Omeley will be but he had his arm by his side and ryles was falling, what made it look worse than a love tap was that big cat laying on the ground to get the penalty, funny how when the penalty was awarded he got up, left the field for the free interchange and returned 10 mins later.

# players that should be cited are your 2 international centres for impersonating players who gave a sh*t and your 5/8 for impersonating a first grade footballer.

Lets not leave out supercaoch for not playing soward, the biggest mistake a coach could make when kicking was going to be the deciding factor.

Quoted for the heck of it. Further proof that you lack balance in this debate.

 

[SuperSoward]

You cant win in the wet without a decent kicking game, simple!

You cannot win games without scoring points, simple!

Gaz was petrified of soliola, simple!

Ben rogers is a joke, simple!

Ryles, well he's just simple!

On the Sa tackle, tell me the last player suspended for tackling a player on suspicion???????????

Enjoy Olympic Park next week

Your supporters should be looking at that game than worrying about the roosters broncos game

Too bad Ryles is one of the best front rowers in the comp at the moment. Ryles sh*ts all over ur front rowers + we got poore out.

 

[Willow]

An accident is what it is

No, he fully intended to tackle a player without the ball. This much we know for sure.

Why not talk about your captain for what he is - a cat

Why not talk about your coaches decision to leave soward out- stupidity

Why not talk about your forward pack - soft

Why not talk about the final score - 10-0

Seems that the subject matter in this thread is upsetting you.

Are you able to stay on topic or are you just here to hijack the thread? Be honest with your answer and we'll see what we can do for you.

 

[_Johnsy]

The funny thing is these things were giving it to us deluxe about one or two saints fans giving it to them before the game, now they are in here doing exactly the same thing they berated a couple of saints supporters for, being fuggwits. Please let us play them again, that is the best they have done all year and cannot improve.

 

[Tommy Smith]

I was being fair dinkum, and if I cared more about it I'm sure I could go through the tape and find loads of incidents, but it would too off-topic and wouldn't resolve anything.An emotional claim posted by a biased supporter.

How can a team be 'constantly' offiside?

Perhaps you should temper your words with facts instead of flights of fantasy.He doesn't score a try until a referee awards it, so its not a try. Blame the ref for not checking with the video ref if you like. As we have seen, referees make mistakes.

FTR, I'm not blaming the referee for the loss.That's because Soliola was deemed to get an arm on the ball. Take off the blinkers... if you can.LOL! There were knock-ons galore and you think you've found one that wasn't. Well done Sherlock.See above.

You're sounding like a sore winner. But please don't stop. I like lists.
I thought it was a typo the first time, but it seems that you're just lousy at spelling. Its spelled 'latitude'. If the word is causing you some grief, perhaps you should look it up.

Free tip:
www.dictionary.com
Well at least you're back on topic.

As I posted earlier, I'm not buying the obstruction defence. Watch the tape again.
It was an attempt to take out a player behind play, and he succeeded. It was an illegal tackle. That much we know.
I don't know if he'll be cited. I'm saying he should be.
Quoted for the heck of it. Further proof that you lack balance in this debate.

I think those comments go both ways.

A biased support generally doesn't realise he's being biased. So who's to say your view on this issue is completely neutral?

Can you honestly say that had it been the other way around and Craegh hit Sa, that you would say Creagh should be cited?

 

[SET2JT]

the ref had a blinder of a game.what happend with priyor when he was lifted by 3 players and he offloaded.how the ref came up with a roosters ball?whats he 2 do?get draged 10m back.im sure if he did that the ref wasnt going 2 give us the penalty

 

[Geohood]

the ref had a blinder of a game.what happend with priyor when he was lifted by 3 players and he offloaded.how the ref came up with a roosters ball?whats he 2 do?get draged 10m back.im sure if he did that the ref wasnt going 2 give us the penalty

You can't offload after 'held' is called.

 

[SET2JT]

how can held be called when the bloke was in the air