Rumoured/Confirmed Signings and More Crap XX

[I'm a loser baby...]

You eff wit.I mean of course at full strength we don't beat them.That goes without saying.Remember how they touched us up with a full side second time we met?
But this was a banged up penrith side. Wallace out-Elijah taylor-Cartwright-Tim grant-Tyrone Peachey may of even been a few others but under my calculations we win by 2 points.

Actually, no, I don't remember. :lol: But what do you mean...with their full-strength side we still win by 2 points? And Tim Grant was never first choice.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Now I enjoyed the dogs losing.Tigers just last week where denied a certain try early in game yet goes un mentioned. The fact is the refs actually made the correct call this time and still being attacked.

Do you think the refs being attacked might have some connection to your hero rubbishing them at every opportunity he gets?

 

[Chipmunk]

TOP 8 LAST YEAR. WE LOSE AGAINST DOGS CAUSE BALL BOY THROWS BALL.

Take those 2 points of dogs and give us these two and we finish 7th and they finish 9th. Do we go on the same run as they did? We beat a stronger manly side than they faced in the finals and beat them. We gave a stronger penrith side a touch up earlier that year too. Just saying.......

If we've got the 2 points over the Dogs, I dare say we wouldn't have beaten Manly a week later..

 

[natheel]

Now I enjoyed the dogs losing.Tigers just last week where denied a certain try early in game yet goes un mentioned. The fact is the refs actually made the correct call this time and still being attacked.

because it was the dogs and souths were the team getting the penalty. All of a sudden people hate souths with a passion and everything goes their way.

 

[lingard]

How good was that game just now Rabbitohs v Dogs? As for the penalty at the end that saw the Rabbitohs win, it was spot on no matter what those imbeciles in the commentary box had to say. Just because it may have been an accident does not make a charge down that hits a players legs and injures him ok.

It's like saying a forearm to the head is ok because the tackler was aiming for the chest and missed. It is still a penalty no matter what. Jeez those commentators need to learn the rules. Every week they get the fundamentals wrong.

The bit the refs got wrong though was where they allowed the kick to be taken from. I don't know why it would/should make any difference because it was a field goal attempt.

I don't either - but evidently, that's what the rules are. If the ref had awarded the penalty from where Reynolds got hit, and Goodwin had missed the goal, Souths fans would (rightfully) be baying for the ref's blood because he hadn't followed the rules. The refs didn't get it wrong - the rule-makers did.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

It's good to see that knees to the head are now ok in the NRL. I feel the game has really suffered from the lack of them.

 

[Bazal]

I don't either - but evidently, that's what the rules are. If the ref had awarded the penalty from where Reynolds got hit, and Goodwin had missed the goal, Souths fans would (rightfully) be baying for the ref's blood because he hadn't followed the rules. The refs didn't get it wrong - the rule-makers did.

Nope. The rules are that way so that teams can't make an illegal and dangerous play to prevent a field goal. The idea is to protect a very vulnerable kicker, and by making the penalty shot (or try scoring opportunity in the case of a missed field goal, where all free kick options are available) easier the idea is to dissuade foul play on him with real on field consequences. Good rule, correctly applied yesterday.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Nope. The rules are that way so that teams can't make an illegal and dangerous play to prevent a field goal. The idea is to protect a very vulnerable kicker, and by making the penalty shot (or try scoring opportunity in the case of a missed field goal, where all free kick options are available) easier the idea is to dissuade foul play on him with real on field consequences. Good rule, correctly applied yesterday.

Exactly right.

 

[Bigfella]

Agree completely.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I disagree.

 

[EelsFan05]

I agree with Pou disagreeing.

 

[T.S Quint]

I agree with Pou disagreeing.

I disagree with that.

 

[Someone]

If we've got the 2 points over the Dogs, I dare say we wouldn't have beaten Manly a week later..

what cost us last year were a couple of early - mid season games that we should have won. One was the round 7 clash vs the tigers on easter Monday. we threw that game away. manly round 2 and vs knights at pirtek losing 16-10 when we were the better side also comes to mind.

We were unlucky not to play finals last year, and if we didn't capitulate in the last 2 rounds that's another 4 points there.

we finished 10th but really we weren't that far away from being a top 6, even a top 4 side.

 

[Noise]

Every team has a few games they should have won. Teams above and below us all could have had an extra 4-6 points if things had gone their way. We were a fair way off being a top 6 team.

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Yeh I think in many cases when middle-of-the road teams play each other, both sets of fans think that 'this is a game that we should win', when in reality it is more like 'this is game that we should win 5-7 times out of 10' (not 10 times out of 10).

 

[Someone]

we were the better team in most of the games I mentioned (except the last 2 rounds).

If we are to become a top 8, even top 6 team we need to win these games while also learning to win when it isn't going all our way.

It a mentality thing. We have the talent which is evident from last weeks performance. As I said, we aren't that far away from being a solid top 6 or 4 team.

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Nope. The rules are that way so that teams can't make an illegal and dangerous play to prevent a field goal. The idea is to protect a very vulnerable kicker, and by making the penalty shot (or try scoring opportunity in the case of a missed field goal, where all free kick options are available) easier the idea is to dissuade foul play on him with real on field consequences. Good rule, correctly applied yesterday.

:thumb

 

[Casper The Ghost]

I disagree.

You have every right to disagree. :lol:

 

[T.S Quint]

Every team has a few games they should have won. Teams above and below us all could have had an extra 4-6 points if things had gone their way. We were a fair way off being a top 6 team.

I think the fact that we missed the Finals by 196 differential points proves that.

 

[TheRam]

Nope. The rules are that way so that teams can't make an illegal and dangerous play to prevent a field goal. The idea is to protect a very vulnerable kicker, and by making the penalty shot (or try scoring opportunity in the case of a missed field goal, where all free kick options are available) easier the idea is to dissuade foul play on him with real on field consequences. Good rule, correctly applied yesterday.

I agree totally. Good rule.