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!

2021 R22 Fri - Brisbane 20-21 Sydney @ Suncorp

Round 22: Brisbane v Sydney

  • Brisbane Broncos

    Votes: 2 40.0%
  • Sydney Roosters

    Votes: 2 40.0%
  • Draw after Golden Point

    Votes: 1 20.0%

  • Total voters
    5
  • Poll closed .

SLRBRONCOS

Coach
Messages
13,714
Rhys Kennedy channelled his inner Ashton Sims tonight and only Brisbane/Melbourne fans will know what I am talking about, if we get through that set and make them cart it 80 metres who knows what happens but I guarantee you it wouldn't have been a gift win for them

The guy is the most error riddled forward we have in our team, no wonder Melbourne didn't want him
I was sitting at the front row of section 732 and nearly jumped off the f**ken thing. Ashton has a special place in hell for that.
 

Chook Norris

First Grade
Messages
8,293
If it's not obvious initially it's probably not a penalty

Are we talking about what's obvious to a reasonable man? Or are we talking about what's obvious to Perenara?

It seemed pretty obvious to me that it was a high tackle. Perenara might be a little slow but he got there eventually
 

nick87

Coach
Messages
11,431
Mate, the charge down rule is forever old.
It is. And i've never liked it. You cant legislate all risk out of the game
And if that's what you want to do, why bother with a half measure like this? Just say any charge down is illegal. If you attack the ball on a kick its an automatic penalty. You have to be passive in kick defence.

But if you want to allow a charge down, you cant bail out halves for kicking so late throught he line that a defender attacking the ball is at the legs. That's on the kicker and attacking team. You cant get a good clean kick away and the player is onside, that's on YOU. Not the defender.

If you want to say defenders are not allowed to contest kicks, fine. But this half measure is trash imo, and always has been. The rule was put in place as a knee jerk reaction to an extremely dirty play purposely attacking kickers in a way that no one did before and no one has done since.
 

blaza88z

Coach
Messages
14,152
Kevvie said it best without actually sounding like a sook, that call would never be made to decide a grand final.

It would never be made fullstop without a hail mary captain's challenge to bail your team out of going down to the team ranked 15th in NRL
 

ColdWetPanther

Juniors
Messages
882
It is. And i've never liked it. You cant legislate all risk out of the game
And if that's what you want to do, why bother with a half measure like this? Just say any charge down is illegal. If you attack the ball on a kick its an automatic penalty. You have to be passive in kick defence.

But if you want to allow a charge down, you cant bail out halves for kicking so late throught he line that a defender attacking the ball is at the legs. That's on the kicker and attacking team. You cant get a good clean kick away and the player is onside, that's on YOU. Not the defender.

If you want to say defenders are not allowed to contest kicks, fine. But this half measure is trash imo, and always has been. The rule was put in place as a knee jerk reaction to an extremely dirty play purposely attacking kickers in a way that no one did before and no one has done since.
Come on; you can charge down without taking out the standing leg. If Radley dives across the player rather than at him he doesnt hurt the player or get a penalty.
 

Valheru

Coach
Messages
13,813
Come on; you can charge down without taking out the standing leg. If Radley dives across the player rather than at him he doesnt hurt the player or get a penalty.

As I said earlier, the problem is that if he does get the ball then the contact is judged to be fine despite it being as dangerous as if he didn't get the ball.
 

Exsilium

First Grade
Messages
7,779
Dude unfortunately for you the roosters were ripped off of the most obvious sin bin of the year.

Gosh that was bad. Almost like the time Kikau did something that should have resulted in a sin binning that time way back when.
 

ColdWetPanther

Juniors
Messages
882
As I said earlier, the problem is that if he does get the ball then the contact is judged to be fine despite it being as dangerous as if he didn't get the ball.
Is it fine though? Is the rule that if you get the ball it is legal? Or is that just one of those things that coaches and dumb talking heads use to justify the talent not being penalised?

If that was also the rule on head-high tackles Broncos win today...
 

Valheru

Coach
Messages
13,813
Is it fine though? Is the rule that if you get the ball it is legal? Or is that just one of those things that coaches and dumb talking heads use to justify the talent not being penalised?

If that was also the rule on head-high tackles Broncos win today...

I believe it is the rule. In the context of a charge down, if rads got the ball there and still contacted Kelly in the same manner it is play on.
 

Sonny83

Juniors
Messages
250
Roosters again show their cowardice. Too scared to play the last minute of football, they waste time and wind down the clock. Surprised they didn't give it to Sam to run away again. f**k that's a bad look.
EVERY team will do exactly the same with less than a min on the clock leading with 6 or less. I'd have no ill feeling to oppositions if they're doing the same, part of sealing the win.
 

Latest posts

Top