R23 | Knights 10-23 Storm @ Hunter | Sun 3.00pm

[K-Man]

I agree with RHCP -perhaps even a 3 point conversion? -Also think if you give away a penalty on the 1st tackle the other team should get 'zero tackle'. -There's a lot of change still needing to be put in place when it comes to reffering.

I think that if a team concedes consecutive penalties (i.e. concedes one, then another one in the set that directly ensues) for ruck infringements / offside - the attacking team should be given a penalty kick for goal AND then receive the ball again from a line dropout. I would also apply this rule to blatantly obvious professional fouls such as the Cronk incident. It would stop the tactic dead in its tracks.

It would give you the chance to score 8 points in a few minutes. Defending teams would very quickly start to question whether it was worth holding down in the play-the-ball that second time, and unlike the 'fear' of the sin-bin (which clearly no longer exists), this might actually cost you on the scoreboard where it really hurts.

You could take the 2 points and the start attacking again from the dropout. If the defending team gave away more penalties you would take another 2 points and start all over again from the dropout.

Imagine if that was the rule when we played the Roosters. I'd love to have seen the Roosters using their ridiculous tactics on the line then.

 

[God-King Dean]

No, it wasn't

I'll kill you.

 

[voltron]

no thats bull
you can blame the refs when they dont punish blatant professional fouls

we deserved to have a man up for 10 minutes
and the storm deserved to be without their main playmaker for that time
they deserved to not have the guy who kicked repeat sets and try assists

we deserved much more than that when we played for it.
whatever you cant blame the refs.
this isnt a matter of just a few 50/50 call
this was 100% professional foul
it was TACKLING a player without the ball, who had no chance of GETTING the ball (from a pass)
all it was, was to stop the player from even having a chance of getting the ball
its not like running off a player, or blocking his way
Cronk JUMPED to tackle him

 

[K-Man]

The NRL has to make players think that committing a professional foul is worse than conceding a try. That's how you stop them. We don't want to become like rugby union where penalties are worth more, so we have to do something different.

I think the idea in my last post would work. It would work in rugby too. Sure, you can can concede a penalty with a professional foul if you really think its best - but it's going to cost you 2 points and the opposition will still be attacking your line next set anyway. Good luck explaining that to your coach if your team was up by 6 points with 10 minutes to play and suddenly finds itself down by 2 points.

I started thinking about this when I heard Gallen say "when they took the 2 points we knew we had them, we spoke about it behind the line and it really gave us self-belief".

That should not happen. There should be no advantage whatsoever, in any circumstances, to conceding a penalty. It should always sting. Why even give players the option to think they can help their team by doing something wrong.

 

[K-Man]

no thats bull
you can blame the refs when they dont punish blatant professional fouls

we deserved to have a man up for 10 minutes
and the storm deserved to be without their main playmaker for that time
they deserved to not have the guy who kicked repeat sets and try assists

we deserved much more than that when we played for it.
whatever you cant blame the refs.
this isnt a matter of just a few 50/50 call
this was 100% professional foul
it was TACKLING a player without the ball, who had no chance of GETTING the ball (from a pass)
all it was, was to stop the player from even having a chance of getting the ball
its not like running off a player, or blocking his way
Cronk JUMPED to tackle him

Exactly. And Cronk walked away having conceded 2 points, quite happily, and knowing he could still steer his side to victory from an even scoreline.

The Storm were happy to give away that 2 points, and that's exactly why it shouldn't be allowed to happen.

 

[RHCP]

Bring back the quick tap as well. If the penalty is inside the fifteen, who gives a f**k where the ref is, tap and go.

Actually, bring back the quick tap everywhere. I still don't understand why they can't do it.

 

[Joker's Wild]

I'll kill you.

I'll make lov....I mean I'll kill you too

 

[K-Man]

If we're all honest with ourselves, we didn't lose becasue of the refs. They did a terrible job and if Cronk was correctly sent off and Uate scores, we probably could have won. Still not much of a difference because it's gonna take a cold day in hell to win the premiership this year. I think our team has improved 10 fold compared to last year but we're never gonna beat one of the top 4 in the finals.

I think we have a really good team and a great game plan. We just lack a genuine star. To be honest if we had signed Hayne, Dugan or even Mini instead of Boyd, we'd be in a much better position.

If you look back on most of our games this year, we dominate metre making and limit opposition forwards really well. Yday, the Storm constantly kicked early because they weren't making any metres. We need someone who can make a try outta nothing, either by himself or lay one on for someone else.

I think we have one of the best 2-6 in the comp (if not the best) but we're having trouble scoring... What does that tell you?

It tells me that you make more and more sense every day, Yosh. I totally agree with you. You can have all the structure and physicality in the world, but a lot of tries in the NRL come about from just a little bit of something special/different. An off-load or piece of skill from a forward the opposition didn't see coming, an extra yard of pace out of dummy half, a fullback who backs himself. Basicallythe spark that you speak of, we don't have.

We do manage the middle of the field grind quite well these days. But we sorely lack an X-factor that isn't Mullen. Jarrod is the chief; he can't be the brilliant spark too. What I wouldn't give to see G. Stewart inside Gagai and Uate, or at least 6 fullbacks other than Boyd.

 

[AceAv]

"I think that if a team concedes consecutive penalties (i.e. concedes one, then another one in the set that directly ensues) for ruck infringements / offside - the attacking team should be given a penalty kick for goal AND then receive the ball again from a line dropout."

I like this rule a LOT... really would shake the dirty defensive goal line tactics up if implemented.

I'll concede and say yes; The Cronk decision really hit Knights hard and let Melbourne think they were in a class room with no teacher. Newcastle should have scored more tries still considering and as much as I hate to say it, Melbourne just defends too well.

 

[NoSchitSherlock]

The NRL has to make players think that committing a professional foul is worse than conceding a try. That's how you stop them. We don't want to become like rugby union where penalties are worth more, so we have to do something different.

.

Agree. It's annoying me in Rugby when they are working there way into field position to take best advantage of an inevitable penalty.
I don't want Rugby League to go that far.
While I conceded that we didn't lose only because of them stretching the rules like they are known for I reckon their professional fouls had a huge impact on us both mentally and by cutting down our plays.

Professional foul = in the bin.

Has anyone else noticed we rarely put in big sideline kicks from penalties? we seem to be content to just punt it over the line and play it safe that it finds the line.

We came out flat in the 2nd half. 1st half we owned. Maybe we thought that if we could hold out for the last 20 then, based on last performances, we could come back at the end of the game. We need more confidence that we can perform under any conditions and according to what the game requires rather than basing our confidence on what we have done before.
We need more wins and big time experience.

 

[Spot On]

Agree. It's annoying me in Rugby when they are working there way into field position to take best advantage of an inevitable penalty.
I don't want Rugby League to go that far.
While I conceded that we didn't lose only because of them stretching the rules like they are known for I reckon their professional fouls had a huge impact on us both mentally and by cutting down our plays.

Professional foul = in the bin.

Has anyone else noticed we rarely put in big sideline kicks from penalties? we seem to be content to just punt it over the line and play it safe that it finds the line.

We came out flat in the 2nd half. 1st half we owned. Maybe we thought that if we could hold out for the last 20 then, based on last performances, we could come back at the end of the game. We need more confidence that we can perform under any conditions and according to what the game requires rather than basing our confidence on what we have done before.
We need more wins and big time experience.

This really stood out in the first half yesterday. It was almost annoying but the breeze was very strong against us???? Someone at the game might be able to comment.

 

[Swarzey]

This really stood out in the first half yesterday. It was almost annoying but the breeze was very strong against us???? Someone at the game might be able to comment.

Yeah, there was a bit of a strong breeze in the first half going against us. Didn't think it affected us that much, but I do agree we need longer kicks.

 

[Nuffy]

This really stood out in the first half yesterday. It was almost annoying but the breeze was very strong against us???? Someone at the game might be able to comment.

I was there and the Storm had a breeze in the first half but not excessive.

I think Mullen rushes and is worried about not finding touch so he is ultra cautious with line kicks.

They might make 15-20 metres max, never a big bite ever.

 

[NoSchitSherlock]

This really stood out in the first half yesterday. It was almost annoying but the breeze was very strong against us???? Someone at the game might be able to comment.

I've been picking it up for a while. Breeze might have been in an influence against Storm but it seems our general approach.

 

[perverse]

It's just being safe. Why risk an extra 5-10 metres with the kick? Mullo has failed to find touch numerous times in the past - occasionally at crucial times, too.

I think it's a case of preferring to take 20~ metres and a fresh set of 6 100% of the time than 30~ or 40~ metres 90% of the time. The fresh set of 6 is the important part, the bonus metres are just that - a bonus. I've got no dramas with it whatsoever, how many free metres we get with our kicks for touch is truly the absolute least of our worries. It's not like we're struggling for metres or field position like in years gone past.

 

[Bring it home Knights]

I remember a game in Canberra 6 or 7 years ago where Johns did a penalty touch finder that went from well inside his own half and ended up 10 metres out from the Canberra line. He then knocked the ball on when feeding the scrum lol.

 

[Spot On]

I was there and the Storm had a breeze in the first half but not excessive.

I think Mullen rushes and is worried about not finding touch so he is ultra cautious with line kicks.

They might make 15-20 metres max, never a big bite ever.

And I think that is a generous distance. Some kicks were about 10 metres on Sunday. Really, a decent first grade kicker should be finding a lot more metres. Every other side does.

 

[The Showstopper]

LOL. We started a thread rightfully pondering how badly we got dudded by refs and typically found a way to blame our side for poor touch finders.