Knights v Dragons Post Match Thread

[Jobdog]

Back on topic a little bit fellas Joey looked very ordinary last night. Because we didn't have anyone else with some sort of kicking game, he was a sitting duck. After every fifth tackle play the ball, the Dragons found where Joey was and headed straight for him. This is because no one else in the team has a kicking game. For this reason, although Kidley has a terrible kicking game, at least its something, he has to go back to five-eight next week. Either him or Tighe should play five-eight cos they have something that resembles a kicking game. Someone needs to take the pressure off Joey cos he has looked very tired in the last few weeks which in itself is a worry.

 

[~bedsy~]

Sure, the rest of the boys stayed out there and applauded those of us who stayed til the end, after half the crowd in attendance hit the exit gates with about 10 to go. To those of u who did, its a bit disappointing.

People around us were leaving with about 20 mins to go [-X
I sayed till the end, my friend was in a rush, but I made him stay haha. My Banner got a bit ruined by the rain, but I might be able to fix it.

As for the game, I was very impressed with how much Buderus put in, I hope he get's a Dally M point for that effort. The Dragons just ran rings around them, it definatly wasn't Newcastle's night.
Archer was pathetic, and how that last try was awarded I'll never know. It had no baring on the game, the Dragons would have won anyway, but that's not the point.

They need to knucle down this week and look at what has gone wrong, hopefully Quinn and Newton will be back for the Bulldogs game, and they do really need the Bye. You can tell how tired they are.

 

[RABK]

Walker Bush - we played well below our best against the Broncos and Tigers!

Sure we came away with two great wins but that doesn't mean anything - fact is we were playing to about 50% of our potential. We all know what we are capable of, we have looked nothing like the team from early in the season.

I stand by my comments thankyou.

 

[RufusRex]

That 2nd hornby try was dead set legitimate .. The commentary box wouldnt have two brain cells to rub between them ... If you want the proof then take a look at this ...
http://groups.msn.com/WorldofRugbyL...ssage=471177&LastModified=4675574221753052163

 

[borat]

It was an extremely close call and could have gone either way. Game was well and truely over by then but.

 

[IanG]

That performance was just piss poor. In fact with 10 minutes to go I decided I'd had enough. Itw as that dragons off side try that was teh last strw for me. So I made my way to the bus stop and went to the club to drown the sorrows

 

[Stuzmeister]

Match v. Storm this year I think eclipses tonights game.

I meant that we hadn't played that poorly WITH JOEY in the side for a very very very long time sorry. My bad.
But yeah that game we were horrendous.

 

[Willow]

That 2nd hornby try was dead set legitimate .. The commentary box wouldnt have two brain cells to rub between them ... If you want the proof then take a look at this ...
http://groups.msn.com/WorldofRugbyLeague/dragons.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=471177&LastModified=4675574221753052163

Don't you mean sourced from here Rufus?
http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=142334&page=4
;-)
Posted on LU yesterday by *Paul*.

By no means as clear cut the Ch 9 commentary were making out.

And I'm still waiting for Gus to jump...

 

[Medievalknight]

Don't you mean sourced from here Rufus?
http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=142334&page=4
;-)
Posted on LU yesterday by *Paul*.

By no means as clear cut the Ch 9 commentary were making out.

And I'm still waiting for Gus to jump...

In that pic tho.......isnt hornbys front foot on the ground ??????????

 

[Willow]

Have a look at the tape mk. It'll answer your question better than the still image can.

 

[Jobdog]

Archer summed it up perfectly when Joey took him to task. Archer said "yes i was checking the onside and his foot was off the ground." That to me tells me that he was offside. Because to be onside, your foot needs to be on the ground right.

 

[Medievalknight]

Have a look at the tape mk. It'll answer your question better than the still image can.

I Did .............and also listened to the audio ..Archers words "video ref looked at it and his foot was OFF the ground"........OFFSIDE

 

[strewth_mate]

Depends which foot he was talking about

 

[Medievalknight]

Depends which foot he was talking about

With all the controversy one would have imagined the back foot...........look at still pic and tell me which foot has weight on it.......we can argue till cows come home doesnt affect the result, all im saying is, officials all need to pull there socks up and get everything right now its a big money game

 

[Holla if ya hear me]

If they are saying that try was ok then you just watch all the players attempt to drag their foot and still be in front of the kicker.hope there is a difinitive direction from finch on this one..tho he will probably say sorry but kiss my ass..Show me one try in the history of the game before that shocker last night when someone was so far in front of the kicker and still been awarded a try..except tfor Fittlers intercept try in the 2000 semi final-that one counts..
On the game..We got stuck in the middle of a slug fest in the first half with no forward looking to offload for 2nd phase..As a result got smashed..leading to tired forwards...PLUS Archer allowing the dragons forwards to hold them down..should have been a million penalties..
Kurt Gidley should have been hooked from the field and made to cool his heels on the bench after that lairising attempted jump and catch.."What was he thinking!!!!!"
But we did gift them some points and field position so we werent that bad as the score suggested
Disappointed

 

[Holla if ya hear me]

PS.Give the reserve grade fullback a run there..Gidley to centre or even bench.I think that he deserves a run and plays there every week with some good touches and pace

 

[Willow]

Archer summed it up perfectly when Joey took him to task. Archer said "yes i was checking the onside and his foot was off the ground." That to me tells me that he was offside. Because to be onside, your foot needs to be on the ground right.

No, that's not how it works and it seems that you may misread the ruling.
Why would Archer be referring to a foot that was on the ground as being off the ground?

In this case, to be onside the front foot needed to be off the ground, and it was.

Hornby's back foot was the one that was on the ground, and his back foot was behind the line when Barrett put boot to ball. Therefore he was onside as the kick was being made... and that was the ruling.

Obviously Archer was referring to Hornby's left (front) foot, ie the one that was off the ground.

 

[Ben]

I don't think tries should be judged by whether a foot is on the ground or not. That is just ridiculous. The offside rule should be judged on whether the body is in front of the kick or not, because it just leaves too many grey areas in the game.

And the fact that the ball hit Hornby in the back just emphasised the fact that he was offside. Maybe he was onside, but it doesn't matter now, each person will have their own opinion to the issue.

 

[Willow]

I don't think tries should be judged by whether a foot is on the ground or not. That is just ridiculous. The offside rule should be judged on whether the body is in front of the kick or not, because it just leaves too many grey areas in the game.

LOL. Well that's an interesting idea but it isn't in the rules nor was it the ruling in this case.

I think you'll find that your proposal would open up a whole lot of new grey areas... and add an unneccessary new dimension with its own set of headaches. It would be near impossible to know which part of the body was in the 'offside air space'.

The ground (and a players contact with the ground) is the best way to gauge offside. It has been that way forever and a reason why we have lines on the RL football field.

 

[Medievalknight]

No, that's not how it works and it seems that you may misread the ruling.
Why would Archer be referring to a foot that was on the ground as being off the ground?

In this case, to be onside the front foot needed to be off the ground, and it was.

Hornby's back foot was the one that was on the ground, and his back foot was behind the line when Barrett put boot to ball. Therefore he was onside as the kick was being made... and that was the ruling.

Obviously Archer was referring to Hornby's left (front) foot, ie the one that was off the ground.

And he could tell this nearly immediately.................come on now ...........PLEASSSSSSSEEEEEEE :sarcasm: