10k fine coming for Trent

[Hutty1986]

Wow. Mary just made Trent sound like a real twat.

http://www.dragons.com.au/news/2016/04/27/mcgregor_.html

 

[coast_dragons]

Robinson is a twat.

 

[Cockosh]

Say the dragons fans.

Most fans and commentators have agreed with his spray.

Hilarious that he brings up Aitken. His recovery last year was as miraculous as nightingales and Dugans multiple efforts.

Obviously Benji doesn't need to be coached to lay down but Ikins question was whether coaches encourage players to stay down and it was an emphatic yes. He has only played at saints and tigers so safe to assume it was their coaching staff he heard it from

Well done on your win you deserved it. The need to lay down takes the gloss of it and it's a shit look for the game. You can deflect all you like but your club now has a reputation for feigning injury. You can point to guerra all you want but that is one example from the chooks in many years compared to repeated incidents from dragons. Most chooks fans condemned guerra for doing it but yet to hear one criticism from yourselves.

 

[SBD82]

Say the dragons fans.

Most fans and commentators have agreed with his spray.

Hilarious that he brings up Aitken. His recovery last year was as miraculous as nightingales and Dugans multiple efforts.

Obviously Benji doesn't need to be coached to lay down but Ikins question was whether coaches encourage players to stay down and it was an emphatic yes. He has only played at saints and tigers so safe to assume it was their coaching staff he heard it from

Well done on your win you deserved it. The need to lay down takes the gloss of it and it's a shit look for the game. You can deflect all you like but your club now has a reputation for feigning injury. You can point to guerra all you want but that is one example from the chooks in many years compared to repeated incidents from dragons. Most chooks fans condemned guerra for doing it but yet to hear one criticism from yourselves.

You still flogging this horse? FMD.

I'll try to make this simple for you.

Benji has been a rugby league player for a long time. He knows what goes on at other clubs better than you or I, who are nobodies on a forum.

And so as not to be broad, I will take one example: the Garbo on nightingale. The guy is a monster and tried to choke out a winger. f**k him, f**k your club and f**k you if you think the person who is more in the wrong is the guy who stays down to draw attention to the fact that the rooster who tackled him is a grubby piece of shit.

If it makes you feel good about yourself you can hate the dragons for this or for any other reason you want to come up with. But if you think dragons supporters will accept a roosters supporter taking the moral high ground you're f**king delusion.

Now, our coach has been done for drink driving. If you could duck over to the other threads and whip up some hysteria to see if you can get him sacked we'd all really appreciate it.

 

[getsmarty]

Say the dragons fans.

Most fans and commentators have agreed with his spray.

Hilarious that he brings up Aitken. His recovery last year was as miraculous as nightingales and Dugans multiple efforts.

Obviously Benji doesn't need to be coached to lay down but Ikins question was whether coaches encourage players to stay down and it was an emphatic yes. He has only played at saints and tigers so safe to assume it was their coaching staff he heard it from

Well done on your win you deserved it. The need to lay down takes the gloss of it and it's a shit look for the game. You can deflect all you like but your club now has a reputation for feigning injury. You can point to guerra all you want but that is one example from the chooks in many years compared to repeated incidents from dragons. Most chooks fans condemned guerra for doing it but yet to hear one criticism from yourselves.

Mate..build a bridge..get over it...Seriously..how long you going to whinge for.

 

[saint.nick]

Say the dragons fans.

Most fans and commentators have agreed with his spray.

Hilarious that he brings up Aitken. His recovery last year was as miraculous as nightingales and Dugans multiple efforts.

Obviously Benji doesn't need to be coached to lay down but Ikins question was whether coaches encourage players to stay down and it was an emphatic yes. He has only played at saints and tigers so safe to assume it was their coaching staff he heard it from

Well done on your win you deserved it. The need to lay down takes the gloss of it and it's a shit look for the game. You can deflect all you like but your club now has a reputation for feigning injury. You can point to guerra all you want but that is one example from the chooks in many years compared to repeated incidents from dragons. Most chooks fans condemned guerra for doing it but yet to hear one criticism from yourselves.

Most rugby league fans have the IQ of a 12 year old Union fan.

Teams lay down every game. You c**ks fans are taking the moral high ground and bitching about it only because it happened against you "on anzac day :crazy: *wah wah wah*"

 

[Cockosh]

You still flogging this horse? FMD.

I'll try to make this simple for you.

Benji has been a rugby league player for a long time. He knows what goes on at other clubs better than you or I, who are nobodies on a forum.

And so as not to be broad, I will take one example: the Garbo on nightingale. The guy is a monster and tried to choke out a winger. f**k him, f**k your club and f**k you if you think the person who is more in the wrong is the guy who stays down to draw attention to the fact that the rooster who tackled him is a grubby piece of shit.

If it makes you feel good about yourself you can hate the dragons for this or for any other reason you want to come up with. But if you think dragons supporters will accept a roosters supporter taking the moral high ground you're f**king delusion.

Now, our coach has been done for drink driving. If you could duck over to the other threads and whip up some hysteria to see if you can get him sacked we'd all really appreciate it.

Hahahaha he tried to choke nightingale!! Fair dinkum mate! It was so bad there is no mention of it anywhere and no charges laid. It was the most innocuous tackle in the whole game. He nearly scored 2 tackles later.

I like responding to people's bs comments. Seems you do to. Does it bother you your team now lays down. I don't hold moral high ground. I actually said I don't mind the dragons.

Settle down champ. It's s forum. Not life and death. No need to get abusive or is that your only argument.

Ps I did duck over to the other one on Mary and said I couldn't care less what he does. Isn't relevant to Monday's game.

 

[H.H]

Yeah he was choked so badly it hurt his forehead. Poor jasey

 

[Leber]

Fmd why is this thread still going?

And f**k you Robinson... The dragons will be bloody fired up this weekend.

 

[Cockosh]

Mate..build a bridge..get over it...Seriously..how long you going to whinge for.

Couple more posts only. I promise.

 

[taxidriver]

Yeah he was choked so badly it hurt his forehead. Poor jasey

You can't see that huge Brillo bad scraping across his face?

 

[Maximus]

That is a direct quote from the referees boss tony archer. He clearly says maxwell and Norrienprompted the on field ref. Get off your high horse especially when you are wrong.

So you actually believe that they told Cummins to stop play and award the penalty, and only watched 2 minutes of footage just for show?

Why do you think that him saying the bunker prompted Cummins to award the penalty means it happened before watching 2 minutes of footage and not after?

Um not really. John grant came out today and said the bunker got it wrong. Let it go. Your bias is clouding your ability to think.

Didn't he just say that the bunker has been inconsistent? Maybe your bias is making you make up things that didn't happen.

My favourite part was this

"It is very disappointing and obviously orchestrated, from a misplaced and spurious belief it was the referees fault," Grant said.
"It is ridiculous. The referee didn't lose the game, the Roosters lost the game."

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

So you actually believe that they told Cummins to stop play and award the penalty, and only watched 2 minutes of footage just for show?

Why do you think that him saying the bunker prompted Cummins to award the penalty means it happened before watching 2 minutes of footage and not after?



Didn't he just say that the bunker has been inconsistent? Maybe your bias is making you make up things that didn't happen.

My favourite part was this

"It is very disappointing and obviously orchestrated, from a misplaced and spurious belief it was the referees fault," Grant said.
"It is ridiculous. The referee didn't lose the game, the Roosters lost the game."

I thought Robbo's main beef was that the constant inference of the VR cost them the CHANCE of winning the game

 

[wibble]

I thought Robbo's main beef was that the constant inference of the VR cost them the CHANCE of winning the game

Well that's just weasel words for the referees costing them the game. He didn't come out and say his team only had the CHANCE up until the penalty he was upset at due to decisions that went the way of his team.

His discussion about bunker processes in general play is totally valid, and I think the NRL need to communicate the processes clearly, and maybe take some feedback on them as well.

His attack of Cummins was inaccurate (I wouldn't want to suggest he deliberately lied but he was again misleading as he was when he said that he just wanted the CHANCE to win), rude, uncalled for, and a blight on the game. That, and his ridiculous mentioning of ANZAC day, completely undermined his legitimate arguments.

I think he was lucky to only be fined, when James Graham was suspended last year for a much less calculated and personal attack of a referee.

 

[Cockosh]

So you actually believe that they told Cummins to stop play and award the penalty, and only watched 2 minutes of footage just for show?

Why do you think that him saying the bunker prompted Cummins to award the penalty means it happened before watching 2 minutes of footage and not after?



Didn't he just say that the bunker has been inconsistent? Maybe your bias is making you make up things that didn't happen.

My favourite part was this

"It is very disappointing and obviously orchestrated, from a misplaced and spurious belief it was the referees fault," Grant said.
"It is ridiculous. The referee didn't lose the game, the Roosters lost the game."

At the risk of being accused of not letting it go let me respond to your changing assertions.

In answer to your first question, yes that is what I think. You were adamant the bunker had no part in telling Cummins to call a penalty. Archer clearly stated they did and now you want to get into semantics about how long and when they made the call.

This from http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-...inconsistent-arlc-chairman-john-grant/7361524

One of the Roosters' main concerns was the inconsistency in the use of the bunker, which Grant admitted was an issue.

"We would expect more consistency of our decision making as distinct from the technology," the ARLC boss said.

Consistency in when the bunker gets involved was robinsons main gripe apart from laying down and Cummins bias. This acknowledges that complaint.

You are using selective quotes to prove all your points. The quotes you gave highlighted refer to robinsons attack on Cummins.

Mate the fact is the vast majority of commentators that know far more about the game than you and I agree that they got the Dylan Napa call completely wrong. Yet you insist it was right. Not getting cited is clear proof of this. That isn't my opinion that is the guys on tv, radio and in the papers. Admittedely they said he was wrong in attacking Cummins. I thought I was stubborn ffs

 

[Maximus]

At the risk of being accused of not letting it go let me respond to your changing assertions.

In answer to your first question, yes that is what I think. You were adamant the bunker had no part in telling Cummins to call a penalty. Archer clearly stated they did and now you want to get into semantics about how long and when they made the call.

Was I? Let me see what I've posted on the issue.

Oh, here's one

The Bunker didn't intervene or call it back at all. Milne dropped the ball, and the refs let play go until the Roosters got tackled, then called time off and asked the Bunker to review the contact. It happens like that 99% of the time.

The Bunker then reviewed and found a high tackle, so it went back to the penalty.

Read the last line very closely, then come and tell me I was "adamant the bunker had no part in telling Cummins to call a penalty."

My stance on how the events played out have not changed at all.

This from http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-...inconsistent-arlc-chairman-john-grant/7361524

One of the Roosters' main concerns was the inconsistency in the use of the bunker, which Grant admitted was an issue.

"We would expect more consistency of our decision making as distinct from the technology," the ARLC boss said.

Consistency in when the bunker gets involved was robinsons main gripe apart from laying down and Cummins bias. This acknowledges that complaint.

You are using selective quotes to prove all your points. The quotes you gave highlighted refer to robinsons attack on Cummins.

Mate the fact is the vast majority of commentators that know far more about the game than you and I agree that they got the Dylan Napa call completely wrong. Yet you insist it was right. Not getting cited is clear proof of this. That isn't my opinion that is the guys on tv, radio and in the papers. Admittedely they said he was wrong in attacking Cummins. I thought I was stubborn ffs

Those comments from Grant don't suggest the decision was wrong at all, which is what you claimed he said. Like I said, you just made it up.

As for commentators, Andy Raymond was caught out tonight now knowing that an attacking player can be tackled in the air. Forgive me for not caring what commentators have to say, especially the ch9 ones whose opinions are solely based on who they placed a bet on. As for journos and radio personalities, they are paid to be controversial as it gets listeners/sales.

Michael Buettner, the guy you were using as proof before, says the penalty was correct. Apparently the MRC's opinion was the be all and end all a couple of days ago, but now their opinion doesn't matter because Ray Hadley agrees with you.

 

[Cockosh]

Was I? Let me see what I've posted on the issue.

Oh, here's one



Read the last line very closely, then come and tell me I was "adamant the bunker had no part in telling Cummins to call a penalty."

My stance on how the events played out have not changed at all.



Those comments from Grant don't suggest the decision was wrong at all, which is what you claimed he said. Like I said, you just made it up.

As for commentators, Andy Raymond was caught out tonight now knowing that an attacking player can be tackled in the air. Forgive me for not caring what commentators have to say, especially the ch9 ones whose opinions are solely based on who they placed a bet on. As for journos and radio personalities, they are paid to be controversial as it gets listeners/sales.

Michael Buettner, the guy you were using as proof before, says the penalty was correct. Apparently the MRC's opinion was the be all and end all a couple of days ago, but now their opinion doesn't matter because Ray Hadley agrees with you.

You are hilarious. So Andy Raymond not knowing one rule makes all commentators opinions null and void? Gees you like using a big brush to paint all your points. The NRL world universally agreed that the bunker is getting it wrong and the Napa incidident is the glaring example and you want to insist all is good? Ok then.
All good champ let's agree to disagree. Ps didn't know Hadley agreed.