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!

2017 R20 Sat - Raiders 14-20 Storm @ GIO

Round 20: Raiders v Storm


  • Total voters
    18
  • Poll closed .

Card Shark

Immortal
Messages
32,237
Thing is,if they bottle the attitude what they did out there tonight,and with any other team not certainties in winning,the Raiders are still in this IMO.

Although they lost,this could be the game that turns it all around.

About as much chance as scoring another try with 5 seconds on the clock.
 

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
I'm just exposing the absolute geniusness of rules in this game

Anyway
Raiders are done
Poetic justice.
Karma
Whatever you want to call it.

Why are the rules geniused ?

The punishment for a professional foul is supposed to be 10 in the bin. So it should be. If anything the refs aren't using it enough because there are about 50 professional fouls a game
 

carcharias

Immortal
Messages
43,120
Why are the rules geniused ?

The punishment for a professional foul is supposed to be 10 in the bin. So it should be. If anything the refs aren't using it enough because there are about 50 professional fouls a game


The high shot would've been better used on a Raiders player.
Or you.
 

chigurh

Guest
Messages
3,958
For all their stupidness i think the Raiders win that if they didn't let that kickoff go dead after scoring
 

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
The high shot would've been better used on a Raiders player.
Or you.

High shots happen. They aren't an automatic send off. A professional foul is supposed to be a sin bin. A sin bin is not the same punishment as a send off.

Are you ok here Carch you seem to be on those heavy duty stupid pills
 

carcharias

Immortal
Messages
43,120
High shots happen. They aren't an automatic send off. A professional foul is supposed to be a sin bin. A sin bin is not the same punishment as a send off.

Are you ok here Carch you seem to be on those heavy duty stupid pills

I'm fine
We won
We are premiers.
I'm more than fine.

That was a send off ...as if I give a shit about Slater
But foul play is foul play
A f**king sinbin for holding down gets a team down a player but a deliberate looking act that is %100 against the rules only brings a penalty.

I'm not having a crack at your hilariously inept squad...just the rules.
 

thorson1987

Coach
Messages
16,907
I'm fine
We won
We are premiers.
I'm more than fine.

That was a send off ...as if I give a shit about Slater
But foul play is foul play
A f**king sinbin for holding down gets a team down a player but a deliberate looking act that is %100 against the rules only brings a penalty.

I'm not having a crack at your hilariously inept squad...just the rules.

The rules are fine as they are.

The issue is our useless as f**k refs not having the balls to actually use them.
 

Pete Cash

Post Whore
Messages
62,165
I'm fine
We won
We are premiers.
I'm more than fine.

That was a send off ...as if I give a shit about Slater
But foul play is foul play
A f**king sinbin for holding down gets a team down a player but a deliberate looking act that is %100 against the rules only brings a penalty.

I'm not having a crack at your hilariously inept squad...just the rules.

The Raiders could win ten thousand spoons in a row (not outside the realms of possibility) and it wouldn't change the fact what Munster did is a textbook example of an act that is punished by the sin bin.

That is a good rule. It should be used more often because the amount of professional fouls in the game is a blight upon the code.

Sia also should have been sent off but again two different situations. Just because the ref bottles it in one doesn't mean he should bottle it in the other
 

The_Shield

Juniors
Messages
1,895
The Raiders could win ten thousand spoons in a row (not outside the realms of possibility) and it wouldn't change the fact what Munster did is a textbook example of an act that is punished by the sin bin.

That is a good rule. It should be used more often because the amount of professional fouls in the game is a blight upon the code.

Sia also should have been sent off but again two different situations. Just because the ref bottles it in one doesn't mean he should bottle it in the other
Agree 2 wrongs don't make a right
 

McLovin

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
33,902
My ribs guys... please... this is comedy central in here...

Soliola penalty on report was sufficient and the correct call. So was the Munster binning...
 

carcharias

Immortal
Messages
43,120
The Raiders could win ten thousand spoons in a row (not outside the realms of possibility) and it wouldn't change the fact what Munster did is a textbook example of an act that is punished by the sin bin.

That is a good rule. It should be used more often because the amount of professional fouls in the game is a blight upon the code.

Sia also should have been sent off but again two different situations. Just because the ref bottles it in one doesn't mean he should bottle it in the other

I'm not disputing the Munster sin bin.
I'm disputing the high shot
It should've been a send off
If a f**king hold down warrants a sin bin then surely a blatant late high shot that puts a bloke on a medi cab, out cold should be at least equal to a send off.

What part of the replay do the bunker need to investigate?

It was about as atrocious as it gets.
 

Latest posts

Top