Round 22 Vs Dragons

[BxTom]

Yeah look mate. Im the first to get cranky about the refs. Cant stand them.

But the video ref cant rule on forward passes so its left to on field ref and they have a very difficult job. The game is faster than ever and theres not two refs on there anymore.

I think the issue hook had and the majirity of nrl fans had with the nathan incident was that we scored off it and the bunker had all the time in the world to review it.

Tbh im happy for that not to be a penalty..it was soft and nothing in it.

But thats been a penalty since they brought the rule in.

Would anyone on here have been upset if it was blown a penalty? No!

The fact some panthers fans are saying it shouldve been a penalty says it all i think.

If the MRC stick to that im happy..but we all know itll be something different next week.

The on field ref called us for a forward pass, if there is any consistency their second try should have been ruled no try - forward pass. That is the problem with the incompetence of the NRL - the bunker should be calling the ref's attention to obvious foul play like that. I thought that they were allowed to inform the ref of such things. Saying that a forward pass is soft and that there is nothing in it is pain stupid.

 

[ColdWetPanther]

We should start a drinking game. Every time there is contact made by a defenders shoulder with an attacker (like Cleary’s) it’s a drink. We will be unable to stand by halftime.

probably the only way to get through a Parra game at the moment.

 

[Smug Panther]

We should start a drinking game. Every time there is contact made by a defenders shoulder with an attacker (like Cleary’s) it’s a drink. We will be unable to stand by halftime.

probably the only way to get through a Parra game at the moment.

You honestly don't think it was a shoulder charge?
Was worth a week clear as day

 

[ColdWetPanther]

You honestly don't think it was a shoulder charge?
Was worth a week clear as day

on the judiciary thread their is an explanation of the four criteria needed for a shoulder charge. Three of the four I would not (and neither did the MRC) think that Cleary satisfied; the only criteria it did meet was failure to wrap the arms.

Did he make contact with his shoulder. Of course. Does that constitute a shoulder charge? I would argue no, and in this case the MRC agrees.

Two points. People will be up in arms about consistency. They have a point. But because they have got others wrong (in my opinion) doesn’t mean that that they should get this one wrong too.

My second point I was trying to make in my last post is that the Cleary-like contact happens once a set every game. If it is a one game suspension every time it happens (not just when the guy spills the ball and the opposition score of it, the coach complains about it in the presser or it happens to a player who is unfairly disliked because of his family connections) then we will be much bigger squads than 30 to field 18 player teams every week.

 

[Bodhi]

Move over Ponga...Nathan Cleary is officially the golden boy of the NRL.

Hold my beer

 

[The_Frog]

on the judiciary thread their is an explanation of the four criteria needed for a shoulder charge.

I've never seen these four criteria before today and think maybe there's been a subtle relaxing of the rule. If so, I welcome it. What you want to deter is tackles with a potential to injure. If there is little force there is no potential to injure. It was getting ridiculous for a while there, even chest contact was being called a shoulder charge.

 

[The_Frog]

Move over Ponga...Nathan Cleary is officially the golden boy of the NRL.

Funnily enough both of them were suspended when we played the Knights in the first game back from the covid break last year.

 

[Abacus]

FMD, numpties on here want to start suspending blokes for not disappearing from the defensive line? It's official, we've reached peak idiocy.

 

[DinkyDi]

The reaction of the women is great to see.