'12 | R24 | Sat | Raiders 24-20 Roosters | Canberra

[Raider_69]

:lol: at Faiders congratulation Joe Picker for a stock standard regulation tackle.

suck a fat one you dopey shite

 

[gypsy]

Cool story. I see you've got the inbred himself on your sig block. Good for you.

 

[Raider_69]

and good on you, maybe one day you cough up the penis you continually choke on

 

[Apey]

1. The ball ended up on the ground after the last Raider came in to help, pushing it down. The only doubt was the time it possibly took even though there have been plenty of tries that have been given after taking a while to get down but they didn't try viewing it in normal speed so I have no idea why they went refs call.

Yes, that is pretty much exactly what the commentators were saying almost word for word. I still disagree. I would happily stand corrected if you can show me a picture (when available) that even remotely suggests the ball actually touches the ground.

2. His arms were the first to touch it backwards, there's a difference between the ball getting knocked on into the opponent and the opponent possibly getting a touch on it on the way back.

Eh, this one was much more 50/50 for me. It looked like there was a small knock-on into the Raiders player to me but it was hard to tell.

 

[bileduct]

Yes, that is pretty much exactly what the commentators were saying almost word for word. I still disagree. I would happily stand corrected if you can show me a picture (when available) that even remotely suggests the ball actually touches the ground.

That was nobhead Alexander saying that, wasn't it? I distinctly remembered him saying something to that effect whilst looking at the big screen and wondered how he had come to the conclusion.

I enjoy Brandy being on the commentary team when the Raiders win though. It's pretty clear that he hates the Raiders with a passion, and he's quick to bitch and moan about anything the referees do that he perceives advantages the Raiders somehow. Every game he whines about the size of the padding on the goalposts and claims the Raiders will be aiming for them - like it's something only the Raiders can do because the pads at the other end of the field are normal sized, apparently... :sarcasm:. In the entire time I've watched the Raiders I can only recall about two or three tries that came from a rebound off the pads.

He's kinda like a Skeepe that actually isn't taking the piss most of the time.

 

[bileduct]

I really can't see what Waddell did to deserve that. Add to that the reports that Buttriss hasn't been playing hooker for Mounties, seems a strange decision.

Isn't that because he was injured?

 

[skeepe]

That was nobhead Alexander saying that, wasn't it? I distinctly remembered him saying something to that effect whilst looking at the big screen and wondered how he had come to the conclusion.

I enjoy Brandy being on the commentary team when the Raiders win though. It's pretty clear that he hates the Raiders with a passion, and he's quick to bitch and moan about anything the referees do that he perceives advantages the Raiders somehow. Every game he whines about the size of the padding on the goalposts and claims the Raiders will be aiming for them - like it's something only the Raiders can do because the pads at the other end of the field are normal sized, apparently... :sarcasm:. In the entire time I've watched the Raiders I can only recall about two or three tries that came from a rebound off the pads.

He's kinda like a Skeepe that actually isn't taking the piss most of the time.

Ironically, the Panthers - where he is a board member - now have similar pads.

 

[Geohood]

Yes, that is pretty much exactly what the commentators were saying almost word for word. I still disagree. I would happily stand corrected if you can show me a picture (when available) that even remotely suggests the ball actually touches the ground.

When watching it it looked pretty clear the ball hit the turf at the end when the reinforcements came. Go watch the replay when its out because it's not in the highlights.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

It's ok, apparently Gypsy tears cure aids.

So keep on crying Gypsy, you'll soon rid the world of this terrible virus.

 

[Pete Cash]

The Roosters supporters are just lucky a lunatic like Gypsy comes into every Raiders thread because they are easily the biggest whingers in the comp relative to how poorly disciplined their own side is. The tears at the chookpen are delicious. The roosters are easily the worst disciplined side in the comp. So why cry about losing penalty counts. The refs could have blown 3 or 4 other penalties easily. They missed a blatant high shot on Papalii and a few ruck infringements especially after that short kick off at the end they could have picked up. The roosters lose penalty counts because they deserve to lose them.

 

[bileduct]

Yeah, you gotta wonder about some of the commenters over at the Chook Pen.

I was there... should Mini have been sent off, and should it have even been a penalty?

From right in front of them (and Canberra stadium's small... they were max 25m away from me!!!) my opinion is that there was no malice. Mini got SMASHED by dugan and fell to his feet but was sorta held up by falling into a player and having Dugan bulldozing everybody.

Due to nothing other than him getting SMASHED and landing awkwardly, a stray, uncontrolled foot hit Dugan in the melon.

Why was Mini sent off and why was this a penalty that cost us the game at the end of the day?

http://www.nospam13.com.au/forum/showthread.php?12697-Mini-s-send-off&p=243451#post243451

 

[bileduct]

The whining about the penalty count is pretty funny too. Even Greg Alexander couldn't complain about the penalties once he had seen the replays. Deliberately dislodging the ball on the fifth tackle, offside at the kickoff, the entire team being offside on a Raiders 20m restart despite the ref screaming for them to get onside... all pretty f**kin' stupid from the Roosters but somehow this is the referees fault for noticing?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

:lol: Oh dear....

 

[skeepe]

:lol:

Roosters fans eh?

bondi-boy sure is a special one. Apparently AFL will take over western Sydney if the Roosters keep getting "unfairly" penalised.

Still, Brian Smith doesn't help. In the press conference last night he said the game was lost in the video ref's box and on the touch line. He actually tried to claim the pass to Pearce where Pearce was standing in front of the guy passing to him should have been let go.

Given that, there's no wonder the fans are loopy.

 

[age.s]

That was nobhead Alexander saying that, wasn't it? I distinctly remembered him saying something to that effect whilst looking at the big screen and wondered how he had come to the conclusion.

I enjoy Brandy being on the commentary team when the Raiders win though. It's pretty clear that he hates the Raiders with a passion, and he's quick to bitch and moan about anything the referees do that he perceives advantages the Raiders somehow. Every game he whines about the size of the padding on the goalposts and claims the Raiders will be aiming for them - like it's something only the Raiders can do because the pads at the other end of the field are normal sized, apparently... :sarcasm:. In the entire time I've watched the Raiders I can only recall about two or three tries that came from a rebound off the pads.

He's kinda like a Skeepe that actually isn't taking the piss most of the time.

Kind of like how Belcher hates Penrith with Brandy actually providing some decent commentary for good measure.

 

[Non Terminator]

The whining about the penalty count is pretty funny too. Even Greg Alexander couldn't complain about the penalties once he had seen the replays. Deliberately dislodging the ball on the fifth tackle, offside at the kickoff, the entire team being offside on a Raiders 20m restart despite the ref screaming for them to get onside... all pretty f**kin' stupid from the Roosters but somehow this is the referees fault for noticing?

Yet, despite it being repeated over and over, opposition fans generally don't even hear our side of the argument.

It's not those penalties we complain about. Bileduct, I completely agree with you. Some of the things we did in that game were beyond, as you say, f**kin' stupid. Add to that, we should've conceeded more, with Waerea-Hargreaves somehow getting off some of those hits which, even if they were shoulder high, would normally read a penalty.

It's the penalty count of the opposition that we complain about. We cost ourselves with our penalty count, but somehow the opposition always lowers their count against us. From memory, we got three or four penalties. This one wasn't so bad, to be fair, but it's a constant.

All I gotta say...

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Maybe the frequency of stupid penalties by the Roosters just makes the other team look so much more disciplined?

 

[age.s]

Yet, despite it being repeated over and over, opposition fans generally don't even hear our side of the argument.

It's not those penalties we complain about. Bileduct, I completely agree with you. Some of the things we did in that game were beyond, as you say, f**kin' stupid. Add to that, we should've conceeded more, with Waerea-Hargreaves somehow getting off some of those hits which, even if they were shoulder high, would normally read a penalty.

It's the penalty count of the opposition that we complain about. We cost ourselves with our penalty count, but somehow the opposition always lowers their count against us. From memory, we got three or four penalties. This one wasn't so bad, to be fair, but it's a constant.

All I gotta say...

Are there stats that back it up?