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!

Dominant Tackles

strider

Post Whore
Messages
79,096
My biggest bitch about the refereeing last night is that I believe Hamstead went into the game with the intention to be harsh on Parramatta by calling dominant tackles against us.

1. last week when we beat the Roosters, Peek was probably flopping into the tackles a bit - I believe it is just the way he runs - he's not really bulky and he concedes easily in the tackles alot - that is considered dominant - fair enough.

2. Having just watched the footy show, Gouldy pointed out that the referees boss told all clubs they'd be cracking down on it this week....that hasn't been mentioned anywhere else in the media - yet Gus very knowledgable about what has happened....coincidence? I don't think so - the Roosters instigated the crackdown.

3. I seems pretty frickin obvious that the whinging Roosters have explicitly complained about our so called flopping....we all know how the NRL listens to the Roosters propaganda machine and how the referee's boss is none other than Mr Finch Snr....So I wouldn't be at all surprised if Hamstead has been instructed to be harsh on us since we were complained about.

4. The first half of the game last night, I was gob smacked at the number of dominant tackle calls against us....yes there were some, but we were getting called on about 3 or 4 every set of 6....and some were just ludicrus - I remember one where Pearson was tackled by someone around the legs, who he fell forward over while another Cowboy wrapped him up over the top - how the hell tackles like that can be considered dominant is just a joke.

5. Our play the ball was slowed markedly because of the constant dominant tackle calls - we never got a chance to get em on the back foot...I know we don't have alot to offer in attack, but if we are denied the ability to get any roll on, we are gone.


For a ref to go into a game set on watching a particular team is wrong....I believe we were made an example of by the Roosters whinging after last weeks loss.

No I am not making excuses for our inept play....but we are a team very low on confidence and when we get hammered by a referee the players get very disheartened and I think the frustration was evident.
 

wittyz chick

Coach
Messages
10,385
strider said:
2. Having just watched the footy show, Gouldy pointed out that the referees boss told all clubs they'd be cracking down on it this week....that hasn't been mentioned anywhere else in the media - yet Gus very knowledgable about what has happened....coincidence? I don't think so - the Roosters instigated the crackdown.

ok sorry its a bit late but anyway

apparantly Hadley (look i know how some of you feel but this might explain it) said that the referees boss Robert Finch was meant to call every team bar Manly (coz they had the bye this wk) and was meant to tell them they are cracking down on that BUT ... Nathan Brown was called at 11:00 (i dunno whther am or pm) and told how they are cracking down on the tackles so Browny had no chance to change his gameplan. And some coaches werent even called to be notified so maybe that can help you!! maybe Smithy wasnt called???
 

Suitman

Post Whore
Messages
56,276
strider said:
For a ref to go into a game set on watching a particular team is wrong....

And you accuse others of stating opinions to be facts???

Where is your evidence that the referee had an agenda??

We were beaten by a team who wanted to win more than we did. Stop your whinging about referees. Its boring.

Suity
 

True EEL

Bench
Messages
4,857
not many people still call Smithy at all these days, so it wouldn't surprise me if he didn't know
 

Latest posts

Top