What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

'10 | R17 | Fri | Broncos 14-16 Tigers | Suncorp

Result: Broncos v Tigers


  • Total voters
    25
  • Poll closed .
Messages
2,524
You mean the three metres that consisted of Farah's foot barely touching down over the dead ball line as he caught the ball? Didn't realise his leg was three metres long.

Regardless:

And my question remains,

When was the last time a team conceded only one penalty for an in-game infringement?

Jeez I was using hyperbole in regards to the first penalty. Ray Charles' reading glasses would have spotted that one.
 

Frank_Grimes

First Grade
Messages
7,023
And my question remains,

When was the last time a team conceded only one penalty for an in-game infringement?

Jeez I was using hyperbole in regards to the first penalty. Ray Charles' reading glasses would have spotted that one.

Hyperbole or not, your insistence on ignoring this:

Frank_Grimes said:
A penalty count doesn't tell the whole story. And you'll also probably notice that I mentioned handling errors ultimately cost Brisbane.

and this:

Frank_Grimes said:
but ultimately handling errors cost Brisbane.
from my first post beggars belief.
 

Big_Bad_Shark_Fan

First Grade
Messages
8,279
Frank Grimes, if that is ur real name which i highly doubt, yes a penalty count does not reflect a whole game, but how were brisbane so badly disadvantaged compared to the tigers?
 
Messages
2,524
Hyperbole or not, your insistence on ignoring this:



and this:

from my first post beggars belief.

Brisbane lost due to their woeful attack (to be expected given the talent that was missing). Despite having ample possession and territory the only time they looked threatening was when Wallace put the ball in the air.

The penalty count was significant due to its obvious disparity in favour of the Broncos (6 discretionary calls to one, if you will) and the fact that the game was played in wet conditions which made it difficult for the players rucking the ball of their own line. The Broncos dominated field position on the back of a brilliant kicking game, the Tigers' errors and .... penalties.
 

Eddie.

Bench
Messages
4,188
Boo Hoo Broncos. I really fell for ya! Not.

The Broncos stole one of the most undeserved victories over us at Campbelltown last season when we had 100 players out with injury. Tonight e issued revenge and it was a sweet way to get it with a try with 2 to go. The Tigers were abysmal, pathetic and at times laughable. However we will take the 2 points and get on the flight home. Thank you.
 

skeepe

Immortal
Messages
48,368
And my question remains,

When was the last time a team conceded only one penalty for an in-game infringement?

Jeez I was using hyperbole in regards to the first penalty. Ray Charles' reading glasses would have spotted that one.

It constantly amazes me how many times the Raiders manage to play against teams that manage exactly that feat. It's happened from memory at least twice already this season.
 

TheFrog

Coach
Messages
14,300
Gould as always gets onto some hobby horse & won't get off. Tonight it was "enthusiastic young kids playing in the park".

How many times did Gould remind us that the Tigers had scored first, the Broncos had players out, and the Broncos were playing all over the Tigers.

It seemed to me that the Broncos butchered a squillion opportunities while the Tigers took the few that came their way.
 

Big Pete

Referee
Messages
29,129
Gutted.

The Broncos nearly got away with that game...but when you're taking on the collective talents of Benji Marshall and Robbie Farah you can never taking time for granted. It says something about them as players when they can come up with the kind of gamebreaking plays they did and every WT supporter should be happy with their abilities.

On the other end, the end I'm much more familiar with and it sucks. The boys really did try and I couldn't be anymore proud of the likes of Hoffman, Winterstein, Beale and Parker but at the end of the day we just made too many mistakes in attack with the ball and off the ball to get the job done.

I want to bring up Peter Wallace who I reckon must be filthy with himself right about now. I'm not at all mad at him because I know he tried...and maybe there in lies the problem with him. He just tries too hard to stick to a play even when it doesn't suit the team. He's got tremendous natural instincts that allow him to evade defenders effectively but when he does that, instead of reacting to it and going with the best option, what he tends to do is stick with the original play...which for instance was the inside ball to Hoffman, even when it wasn't usually on.

Norman was also very nervous tonight. Like most young halves he still needs to work on his defence and he needed to do more to direct the side around the park. It's hard to be too cross with him though, I mean really it was up to Wallace to carry the burden of leading the side around the park, but Norman had to talk to his outside backs more and needed to position them better in conjunction with himself. Hopefully he takes a page or two out of this game.

This result may suck, but I remember a similar performance in 2006 against the Dragons where they pulled it out of the fire in the final 2 and we went onto win a premiership that season. Hopefully this result spurs the boys on and we come out firing against the Titans with *knock on wood* our full contigent.
 

hitman82

Bench
Messages
4,937
Tigers all looked hungover. Couldn't concentrate, slow, lethargic, down in the mouth. Yeah, hungover I'd say
 

gronkathon

First Grade
Messages
9,266
What a terrible game. Ranks number two on the worst list narrowly behind the Nukes V Eels drudgefest.

Happy with the two points. Unhappy with the quality of reff and performances.

Most upset that we lost Ellis to injury though
 

thommo4pm

Coach
Messages
14,786
You mean the three metres that consisted of Farah's foot barely touching down over the dead ball line as he caught the ball? Didn't realise his leg was three metres long.

Regardless:

I'm glad you said that. I don't think Farah had grounded his leg when he caught that ball from the kick off. Should have been a line drop out from what I could see. Ch 9 only showed 1 very quick replay of it.

Thought the play the ball before the Tigers last play was a knock on by Payten also. He seemed to lose control of it when playing it.
 

God-King Dean

Immortal
Messages
46,614
Glad I'm not the only one who missed the knock-on by Payten before the last try.

I've never been more gutted for team where I'm watching it as a neutral.
 

Vic Mackey

Referee
Messages
25,493
watched the game again. payten didnt knock it on, but it was a sloppy play the ball. if it got called up we couldnt have complained.

and the broncos also knocked on in the play the ball for their second try.
 

Latest posts

Top