Please, please change this rule *Melbourne/Tigers spoiler*

[Iafeta]

Melbourne/Tigers spoiler, don't read any further if you don't wanna know...






















Daine Laurie gets penalised for a tackle on a kicker. He's committed to the tackle, when he sees Cronk is going to kick he deintensifies and gives Cronk what can only be described as a love tap. The referee blows a penalty, Melbourne score. It's a disgraceful rule. If Laurie pulls out of that tackle, Tim Sheens would blow up at his player because a decent half would throw a step into his work and create a gaping hole for a line break.

The whole ruling was brought in for the Dave Taylor/Mark Riddell type situation from a couple of years ago where there appeared to be a proliferation of elbows and shoulder charges on defenceless halfbacks. That's fair enough, that's a cheap shot, but here the bloke is putting pressure on to make a tackle incase the halfback decides to run, or more importantly to turn an easy no pressure kick into a kick under pressure.

For the love of god, get some common sense into it and lets see halfbacks have to stand a bit deeper instead of having cart blanche free for alls standing flat at the line and kicking under no pressure.

 

[Ladmate]

Storm did that and no penalty.

 

[~knights~]

they should only penalise if they attack their legs whilst kicking(re kimmorely) ...not upper body contact

shouldn't even be a penalty really

 

[God-King Dean]

There was only a penalty because it looked spectacular.

 

[Perth Red]

not as bad as you can't knock on with your chest! I'm sure if it had been a forward receiving a pass from the dummy half and it hit him in the chest it would have been deemed a knock on. Anypart of your upper body should constitute a knock on imo.

 

[Perth Red]

Storm did that and no penalty.

Storm player hit him as he had the ball, Laurie was about a second after the ball had gone. Personally I would prefer neither to have been a penalty but there was def a difference between the two.

 

[ozbash]

right decision imo and Laurie should miss games because of it.

He's a thug and a cheap shot merchant.

 

[Flapper]

right decision imo and Laurie should miss games because of it.

He's a thug and a cheap shot merchant.

Oh for f**k's sake.

As for the chest thing, I have no problems with people chesting balls, it's a valid way of getting a kick under control.

 

[brooksy19]

bullsh*t ozbash.

It was NO different to the hit on morris in the first half. The difference is Cronk plays for Melbourne (A glamour team) whilst Morris plays for the lowly Tigers.

The refferees dead set have teams that they give 50-50 calls to becaus ethat team is percieved to be a better team and they don't want to upset the apple cart.

Of sick of it and it really turns you off the game.

Cost Tigers the game in the end.

Not to mention the penalty count. Melbourne lay all over us in the ruck and the ref has time to say 'get out of there cooper' or 'get off him anthony (quinn)' nearly every tackle but not ONE ruck penalty..:roll:

 

[AILD]

lolDaine Laurie

 

[ozbash]

Dainty Laurie = wannabe Mark Geyer

 

[Flapper]

He needs time to, among other things, learn to catch and generally keep a cool head. One extreme to the other today.

 

[Marshall_magic]

I reckon if it was an outside back or a half who did the same thing (lets say Ayshford), impact and timing were exactly the same, no penalty would have been awarded, it was because of the player who put the hit on. Terrible call, but we got our own back later in the game when we scored after a terrible play the ball from Tuiaki.

 

[ozbash]

when we scored after a terrible play the ball from Tuiaki.

dead right, and the Storm player who was sent off by Klein for an identical tackle.

 

[innsaneink]

right decision imo and Laurie should miss games because of it.

He's a thug and a cheap shot merchant.

Thought you balls, not a handbag.

Youre another that should go watch badminton

 

[Iafeta]

Are you seriously suggesting Laurie's tackle was anything like the Storm's high shot?? Are you a French referee? The tackle from Laurie was rib high at worst.

Pulllleeeaaaaasssseeee tell me you're having a tug here.

 

[Perth Red]

I think you'll find it was Laurie that cost you the game, not the refs!

ps given you scored after a very poor ref mistake and you got a red card decision you can hardly complain!

 

[Medievalknight]

dead right, and the Storm player who was sent off by Klein for an identical tackle.

Correct decision IMO.

 

[Marshall_magic]

It wasn't the bad call against Laurie that cost us the game. We should have still kept them out. Once a bad call goes against you, you have to wipe it from your system, but we reacted poorly. Same with Melbourne and the Tuiaki Fumble.

Laurie didn't cost us that game, even though he botched a try, he did force a few errors. We just didn't play to our strengths. Sent all our ball to Hanbury/Ryan instead of Lawrence/Tuiaki. Dumb.

 

[Molly]

bullsh*t ozbash.

It was NO different to the hit on morris in the first half. The difference is Cronk plays for Melbourne (A glamour team) whilst Morris plays for the lowly Tigers.

The refferees dead set have teams that they give 50-50 calls to becaus ethat team is percieved to be a better team and they don't want to upset the apple cart.

Of sick of it and it really turns you off the game.

Cost Tigers the game in the end.

Not to mention the penalty count. Melbourne lay all over us in the ruck and the ref has time to say 'get out of there cooper' or 'get off him anthony (quinn)' nearly every tackle but not ONE ruck penalty..:roll:

:lol: This post is a joke, right...!?