RIP NRL

[Mr Spock!]

You know we’re not whinging that we won. We accept the result. Why wouldn’t we? We also accept the officiating was a farce but counter that it went both ways. You know it did. We are simply offering up a counter argument. Not whinging, just not letting you guys take the gloss off an historical achievement

Obviously it didn't go both ways.

And yeah you're whinging over 2 incidents which ultimately decided the match is ironic and gave the Roosters the premiership is ironic.

 

[Mr Spock!]

Yes i would be, i don't go for the Rabbitohs.

Whatever..

It was a blight on rugby league.

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

Obviously it didn't go both ways.

And yeah you're whinging over 2 incidents which ultimately decided the match is ironic and gave the Roosters the premiership is ironic.

No it didn't decide the match you frikin............

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

It's a bit like Jack Wighton winning the CCM with JWH being told the award was his. The correct decision was ultimately made but that doesn't make what happened completely amateurish.

Wighton was fantastic but I don't agree he was MoM. With all the ball and field position that Canberra had, he didn't create anything in the second half, which is his job as a half to create points. Granted he scored the try in the first half. JWH was the standout and made 185 metres and 41 tackles and I believe he should have got it,

Touching on the booing of Wighton for receiving the CCM. I don't think Roosters fans were booing Wighton, I certainly wasn't, he was great and put in a courageous performance, they were booing the process. This is the second time in 3 GF Wins that bias judges, and they are biased awarded the CCM to a losing player.

 

[Mr Spock!]

No it didn't decide the match you frikin............

LOL yeah it did given that it led to 2 easts tries, derp.

 

[Mr Spock!]

Wighton was fantastic but I don't agree he was MoM. With all the ball and field position that Canberra had, he didn't create anything in the second half, which is his job as a half to create points. Granted he scored the try in the first half. JWH was the standout and made 185 metres and 41 tackles and I believe he should have got it,

Touching on the booing of Wighton for receiving the CCM. I don't think Roosters fans were booing Wighton, I certainly wasn't, he was great and put in a courageous performance, they were booing the process. This is the second time in 3 GF Wins that bias judges, and they are biased awarded the CCM to a losing player.

Lol booing the process.

Like fans booing the process of f***ing up the gf.

Now easts are whinging their player didn't win CCM after being gifted a GF.

 

[Tommy Smith]

I don't get the hysteria over the trainer incident.

The correct rule was applied. And even so Soliola should have been penalised for taking out Keary's legs.

How can a team be robbed when the rules were correctly applied?

I think the Roosters were robbed when Wighton scored because he shouldn't have been allowed to make a linebreak loool

Anyway the trainer didn't force Tapine to be a lazy back turning slob at marker for the try.

In contrast in the 2nd half when Cummins was raping us at every opportunity for 30 minutes we didn't get bitter, we got better.

And that's why we won.

 

[Mr Spock!]

I don't get the hysteria over the trainer incident.

The correct rule was applied. And even so Soliola should have been penalised for taking out Keary's legs.

How can a team be robbed when the rules were correctly applied?

I think the Roosters were robbed when Wighton scored because he shouldn't have been allowed to make a linebreak loool

Yeah it was really the Roosters who were robbed.

More Rooster self pity for winning the premiership.

Lets just overlook the glaring issues in that game.

 

[Game_Breaker]

I don't get the hysteria over the trainer incident.

The correct rule was applied. And even so Soliola should have been penalised for taking out Keary's legs.

How can a team be robbed when the rules were correctly applied?

I think the Roosters were robbed when Wighton scored because he shouldn't have been allowed to make a linebreak loool

Anyway the trainer didn't force Tapine to be a lazy back turning slob at marker for the try.

In contrast in the 2nd half when Cummins was raping us at every opportunity for 30 minutes we didn't get bitter, we got better.

And that's why we won.

NRL is already speaking about changing the rules

 

[mave]

It's a bit like Jack Wighton winning the CCM with JWH being told the award was his. The correct decision was ultimately made but that doesn't make what happened completely amateurish.

Haha. Post of the thread.

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

Obviously it didn't go both ways.

And yeah you're whinging over 2 incidents which ultimately decided the match is ironic and gave the Roosters the premiership is ironic.

You’re really hurting now, aren’t you. Time for closure, son.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

Lol booing the process.

Like fans booing the process of f***ing up the gf.

Now easts are whinging their player didn't win CCM after being gifted a GF.

You'd know all about being gifted a GF, the only one you have won in more than 45 years. Thanks for Keary, Crichton and Butcher too. Any more good young players coming through? If they are any good they will want to join the Roosters too.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Lol, @Tommy Smith, if it was the other way he would be in the foetal position crying about a conspiracy against the roosters.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

Lol, @Tommy Smith, if it was the other way he would be in the foetal position crying about a conspiracy against the roosters.

If you had a player wrongly sin binned for 10 minutes, we would have scored 2 tries. We also would have defended the situations you didn't.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Why does every club need a Skeepe in here? Can’t beat the original.

 

[firechild]

If you had a player wrongly sin binned for 10 minutes, we would have scored 2 tries. We also would have defended the situations you didn't.

I'm one of the few people on here that doesn't mind the Roosters but that was a correct sin binning 100%.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

I'm one of the few people on here that doesn't mind the Roosters but that was a correct sin binning 100%.

The sin bin occurred in the set directly after Canberra received a penalty when Elliott Whitehead dropped the ball cold in the ruck. It should have been a scrum and Roosters ball, not a Raiders penalty. Sutton even ruled dropped ball, when Ben Cummins stepped in a blew the penalty.

 

[nick87]

I'm one of the few people on here that doesn't mind the Roosters but that was a correct sin binning 100%.

Of course it was. Anyone disputing it is a fool.
That's been a sin bin all year long and was correctly ruled here.

 

[firechild]

The sin bin occurred in the set directly after Canberra received a penalty when Elliott Whitehead dropped the ball cold in the ruck. It should have been a scrum and Roosters ball, not a Raiders penalty. Sutton even ruled dropped ball, when Ben Cummins stepped in a blew the penalty.

Oh, so we're talking butterfly effect here. How far can we go back with what-ifs?

 

[Springs09]

Nope.

Roosters benefitted from two farcical episodes in the game.

A ball hitting a trainer who shouldn't have been on the field.

And confusion from an overrule during live play.

Oh and those are the only two incidents that affected the entire game? Raiders didn't drop a ball or miss a tackle or make any wrong decisions at all?