RIP NRL

[AlwaysGreen]

f**k I hate people who talk about narratives

 

[typicalfan]

Just remember the six again was not one error it was three.

The initial error was to signal six again, the second was to change the decision and the third was to order the handover. All 3 actions were errors. But 3 wrongs make a right for some people.

 

[Tommy Smith]

I also like the myth that we didn’t look like scoring. You know like when Cronk illegally took Papalii on suspicion with not a roosters player with a chance of tackling him if he broke that tackle

In hindsight we should have just committed a professional foul in the lead up to that last try and trusted we could defend with 12 men for the ten minutes. Tries are at a premium in finals games. It’s a better option than letting a team get a roll on like that. Which is a sad indictment of the current game

You did more than look like scoring. All BJ had to do was execute a basic catch and pass to Rapana and you take the lead and probably win.

But no, as we know it isn't enough for Joey to take the shortest route from A to B. Instead he tried to take the detour to overcomplicate things and he bombed it.

Sometimes the best touch of the ball is the simplest and shortest one, Joey.

Frankly he's lucky Cummins is the enemy because BJ is far more to blame for the loss.

 

[Pete Cash]

Sterlo thought it was 100% incorrect. Again, it was subjective and people I've heard talk about it in the media mostly think it was the wrong call.

And we're not whinging, merely debating. Isn't that the point of this forum?

Why must every alternate opinion put forward be deemed a whinge.

Sterlo is an ex halfback seething at the prospect of tackling papalii

 

[Pete Cash]

You did more than look like scoring. All BJ had to do was execute a basic catch and pass to Rapana and you take the lead and probably win.

But no, as we know it isn't enough for Joey to take the shortest route from A to B. Instead he tried to take the detour to overcomplicate things and he bombed it.

Sometimes the best touch of the ball is the simplest and shortest one, Joey.

Frankly he's lucky Cummins is the enemy because BJ is far more to blame for the loss.

Nah Joey played well. It would be unfair to scapegoat him

 

[Tommy Smith]

f**k I hate people who talk about narratives

The big dance was always going to have a few narratives in the lead up.

I just feel as though the narrative in the aftermath of the big dance hasn't done the game of Rugby League any favours.

 

[typicalfan]

The sin bin i see both sides. My initial opinion was that Cronk knew what he was doing. He very rarely errs and is highly experienced.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

For 15 years Tommy has been raging about a conspiracy against the Roosters by the refs.

I game has converted him into believing they're his new God

 

[typicalfan]

The big dance was always going to have a few narratives in the lead up.

I just feel as though the narrative in the aftermath of the big dance hasn't done the game of Rugby League any favours.

However the gf is viewed the Roosters are a fantastic side and the game was the most tense club game for quite a while.

The Roosters made history and look like they can have prolonged success.

 

[Tommy Smith]

For 15 years Tommy has been raging about a conspiracy against the Roosters by the refs.

I game has converted him into believing they're his new God

Not one game, just that one call. When it occurred I wondered wtf happened as I saw the 6 again call clear as day behind the posts.

But when I saw the changeover I said to myself "jolly good call, Ben, good day Sir!"

I was like a Brexiteer. I couldn't explain why what Ben had just done was the right call, I just felt it in my bones.

But make no mistake, for the first 30 minutes of that 2nd half I was frothing at the gash over Ben Cummins.

I was preparing my big whinge and was ready to update my penalty stats.

So yes, you're right.

Lay off the refs guys, they have a tough job.

 

[nick87]

I think we have.

But, you really haven't
Instead what you've done in go on a crusade trying to justify the 6 again call, which can not be justified, dismiss the trainer fiasco because of some argument about it being a penalty because you don't really understand the rule book around charge downs, and engaged in a false equivalency argument linking the Whitehead strip to the 6 again...

It's just a bizarre reaction. And just as the "narrative" around this game not doing justice to the game itself, this reaction does the roosters fans no justice either. And as far as a forum like this goes, only serves to stoke the flames of people wanting to invalidate what your club achieved.

 

[Pete Cash]

People should go and rewatch the Cronk sinbin just to see how likely it is that we score if papalii gets a fair crack at the ball

Top defensive teams are all pretty good at defending with 12. We did it pretty easily the week before against Souths. That’s why I lean towards changing the interpretation of a penalty try. It should be codified that we have to assume the player committing the foul play was not in the play at all and from there it should be a matter of if the ref believes the player was likely to score

If Cronk is not involved at all papalii strolls across the line

 

[Game_Breaker]

I’ll also point out that Raiders didn’t need to score a try to win the game
They were physically on top and dominated the Roosters at that point in the match (10mins to go)

Al they needed was a field goal and they most likely would’ve won. They had a better chance at achieving that than the roosters

 

[Captain Apollo]

I’ll also point out that Raiders didn’t need to score a try to win the game
They were physically on top and dominated the Roosters at that point in the match (10mins to go)

Al they needed was a field goal and they most likely would’ve won. They had a better chance at achieving that than the roosters

So 1 a one point lead with 10 minutes to go always = a win does it?

 

[bileduct]

This btw was the general response to the Vunivalu incident...

View attachment 33625

Note the amount of likes. The touchie was a hero.

Where's the monument to Ben Cummins? Nowhere to be seen.

In its place we have "RIP NRL".

So just be honest guys. No one is outraged by a rough referee decision. You're all outraged that the Roosters benefited this time.

The vast majority of NRL fans have no issue with refs screwing up - because we know it's part of the game - they just want the teams they hate to be on the receiving end.

This is bullshit, guy.

Referees make wrong calls in every game and stick to them. We've learned to live with that. Only a few weeks before in a round 22 Raiders vs Storm match Vunivalu was standing in touch when he knocked the ball back into the field of play and play continued, which was an even more obvious miss than the wrong decision a few weeks later. Probably one of the most blatant misses from the referees all year. If karma really is a thing then what happened in round 1 of the finals evened out what happened in round 22.

What is infuriating is that despite the touch judge debacle last year in the Raiders vs Sharks game (which the Sharks scored off) the NRL still haven't come up with a solution for when the referees f**k up and give a wrong signal and then change their minds mid play.

 

[bileduct]

So 1 a one point lead with 10 minutes to go always = a win does it?

It is if no other points are scored.

That's a bit of a no brainer, innit?

 

[Game_Breaker]

So 1 a one point lead with 10 minutes to go always = a win does it?

Doesn’t guarantee a win
It makes them more likely to win given the roosters were being dominated at that point

 

[H.H]

Just read this entire thread, not sure why I put myself through it. It's great that everyone has an opinion, but you merkins are going in circles, it'll never be resolved.

Facts are, it was a f@#ken awesome game of footy, unfortunately both teams copped some calls they could rightfully be unhappy with, but at the end of the day, the Roosters won and they deserved it.

End of...now close this thread and move on.

 

[Canard]

Just read this entire thread, not sure why I put myself through it. It's great that everyone has an opinion, but you merkins are going in circles, it'll never be resolved.

Facts are, it was a f@#ken awesome game of footy, unfortunately both teams copped some calls they could rightfully be unhappy with, but at the end of the day, the Roosters won and they deserved it.

End of...now close this thread and move on.

Thanks mate, such an intelligent and well thought out post.

Well just stop talking about this now, because you don't like the "feels" of the thread.

 

[Canard]

People should go and rewatch the Cronk sinbin just to see how likely it is that we score if papalii gets a fair crack at the ball

Top defensive teams are all pretty good at defending with 12. We did it pretty easily the week before against Souths. That’s why I lean towards changing the interpretation of a penalty try. It should be codified that we have to assume the player committing the foul play was not in the play at all and from there it should be a matter of if the ref believes the player was likely to score

If Cronk is not involved at all papalii strolls across the line

LU has led a crusade (mostly quite rightly in my opinion) about the Storm's wrestling tactics over the last decade.

Yet the Roosters, via Robinson, have introduced a blight on the game, that is every bit as bad, if not worse, being the strategy of giving away deliberate penalties on the try line to stop tries.

Complete arsewipes like Gould laud this tactic as "heroic" defence and whinged incessantly when the League tried to crack down on it. So any crocodile tears, for the Roosters in this situation is laughable.