Phil Gould Watch

[Pumpkin]

Xavier Coates is offside in a kick chase which results in a try. The try is consequently disallowed. Phil Gould complains. He agrees that Xavier was offside but thinks they should have allowed the try anyway.

 

[Vee]

Phool's Gold.

 

[Pumpkin]

In fairness Phil Gould made a lot of sense on 100% footy, apart from not understanding that shoulder charges are illegal, regardless of the situation.

 

[Pumpkin]

I made this thread to make fun of Phil Gould, but he's making a fool of me. He said emphatically 3 or 4 times that Ryles would not join the Dragons when everyone, every journo, thought it was a done deal. Absolutely amazing.

Edit: Gould fooled me again. He actually orchestrated the whole thing and talked Ryles out of it. What a sinister mongrel. Stupid Ryles for listening to him.

 

[Pumpkin]

Gus states in the Tigers Canberra match that the Tigers are getting on top here. Immediately the Tigers pass the ball over the sideline and Canberra score two quick tries. Gus makes no admission of his mistake.

Later in the game Gus warns of Canberra's tendency to go to sleep in the last ten minutes. When this happens, Gus repeatedly boasts about himself.

Again, Gus has no respect for the rules when he complains about a penalty for a field goal kickers legs being taken out from under him.

 

[Pumpkin]

Phil Gould comments during the Penrith Storm match, when the score was close, that Melbourne are a champion team and they aren't out of it. As soon as he said that I knew Penrith would run away with it, which happened.. Melbourne never scored another point. He's always wrong and never admits it. If he ever gets something right he broadcasts it from the rooftops. Madly in love with himself. Wouldn't be surprised if he has a romantic, candle lit dinner with himself, just with a mirror on the other side of the table.

 

[axe&smash&crush]

Gus wants NRL to support international game, great, I agree.

Maybe he can start by keeping his thoughts to himself regarding the World Club Challenge after years of disparaging comments about the concept or better still support the concept!

 

[axe&smash&crush]

Vegas WCC could have worked for the game as a whole

 

[blue bags]

Origin in Vegas

 

[Perth Red]

Origin in Vegas

That’d be a big cash hit for nrl. At moment states are paying $5-10mill to host plus sell out crowds at expensive ticket prices, your getting non of that in Vegas for,origin.

 

[RL The greatest game]

Vegas WCC could have worked for the game as a whole

Go where the big bucks are

 

[blue bags]

That’d be a big cash hit for nrl. At moment states are paying $5-10mill to host plus sell out crowds at expensive ticket prices, your getting non of that in Vegas for,origin.

State of Origin 4 in Vegas
Exhibition game with pride

 

[Todd Hoffman]

Did Rothfield start this thread?

 

[Captain Apollo]

NRL dropped a $20k fine on him -

Phil Gould breach notice

The National Rugby League (NRL) today issued Bulldogs General Manager of Football Phil Gould with a breach notice alleging a breach of the NRL Code of Conduct (Code).

www.nrl.com

 

[SBD82]

NRL dropped a $20k fine on him -

Phil Gould breach notice

The National Rugby League (NRL) today issued Bulldogs General Manager of Football Phil Gould with a breach notice alleging a breach of the NRL Code of Conduct (Code).

www.nrl.com

This is pretty interesting. He was acting in a role in media, but I assume he’s been fined as an employee of the Bulldogs.

Can’t help thinking this was inevitable with him taking the dual role. Although I wonder whether the NRL code of conduct covers him when he’s acting as an employee of a different organisation.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

He's made a lot of money from a game he thinks is stupid.

 

[Desert Qlder]

He's bang on about the seven tackle rule. It's mind-numbingly stupid.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

He's bang on about the seven tackle rule. It's mind-numbingly stupid.

Gould is completely wrong. The phrase "7-Tackle Set" is a misnomer. No such thing in the rulebook.

When the non-offending team take possession following an opposition error, the result is a "Zero Tackle". This rule applies anywhere on the field. When the error is committed in the in-goal, the only difference is that the mark is moved to the middle of the 20m line and play resumes with a tap. It's the same rule.

 

[Desert Qlder]

Gould is completely wrong. The phrase "7-Tackle Set" is a misnomer. No such thing in the rulebook.

When the non-offending team take possession following an opposition error, the result is a "Zero Tackle". This rule applies anywhere on the field. When the error is committed in the in-goal, the only difference is that the mark is moved to the middle of the 20m line and play resumes with a tap. It's the same rule.

Why is a kick to touch in-goal an 'error', as you say, and not a kick into touch?

You can dress it up however you want, but seven tackle sets from a 20 metre line restart, are still shit and totally disproportionate. There is no coherent logic to their application as you're intimating.

Whether Gould is carrying on like a pork chop or not, fans know this instinctively.

 

[Desert Qlder]

Not only this, but allowing the quick tap rather than the old tap (on the ground, remove the hands) gives even more advantage to the defending team. Compounding the issue.

The zero-tackle rule was originally implemented as it was considered unfair for a tackle to be registered when a player dives on a loose-ball with limited opportunity to run.

Applying it to in-goal errors is high bastardry of it's original purpose.