StuBoot
Bencher
And as there was no penalty they couldn't challenge is the way I read it.
So did he challenge the knock on in the tackle/play the ball or the high tackle is the question?
Other Games [Round 22, 2021]
- Thread starter globaleagle
- Start date
-
We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
So did he challenge the knock on in the tackle/play the ball or the high tackle is the question?
From memory Tedesco mentioned something about the tackle on Tupouinua when he made the challenge. That's what Klein asked to be specifically reviewed when he sent it to the bunker
Why hasn’t this been made a bigger deal?
I was shocked when I saw Cleary do an obvious shoulder charge and the only one to call him out on it was Tallis during the commentary....Voss and Ennis just changed the conversation and when it was replayed again....there was silence in the commentary team and they went back to talk about Burton again.
I like Cleary but that was the most obvious shoulder charge I’ve seen this year.....it could only be because it’s Cleary that he got away with it. Everyone saw it so how can he NOT be charged?
Gobsmacking
cc eagle
Bencher
Fully agree, and nothing from MRC
cc eagle
Bencher
Triple M saying no charge to answer from MRC
S
Shnorky
Guest
But they have called it the terrific teddy challenge, so that will be covered somewhere in the fine print.
cc eagle
Bencher
Bit of confusion there, triple M saying the fine was for contact with the kicker
Brookie Bob
"I come back to you now at the turn of the tide"
Everything around forward passes in the rules is a bit of a sacred cow, isn't it? Don't question anything, nothing to see here................
No problem, Politis will probably get a couple of former High Court judges to turn up pro bono to get him off
The Who
Journey Man
You know, another rule that irritates me is the 'pinkie on the football is sufficient to award a try' rule. I reckon dozens of "tries" these days are being awarded when they don't deserve to be. A perfect example was the Saab "try" against the Sharks when he threw the ball at the try line. I was shocked (but happy) that this was awarded.
I am old fashioned but whatever happened to having to exert 'downward pressure' on the ball, or better still 'control of the ball'?
These days all a Vidiot has to do is free-frame a screen shot showing a finger on the ball and they rule it a try. Na, too airy-fairy for me. I want to know that a player actually has control of the ball in order to score a try. Surely that has always been the intent of RL, and changing rules is no problem under PV's regime.
I am old fashioned but whatever happened to having to exert 'downward pressure' on the ball, or better still 'control of the ball'?
These days all a Vidiot has to do is free-frame a screen shot showing a finger on the ball and they rule it a try. Na, too airy-fairy for me. I want to know that a player actually has control of the ball in order to score a try. Surely that has always been the intent of RL, and changing rules is no problem under PV's regime.
cc eagle
Bencher
MG on triple M, protecting Cleary, saying nothing in it, no malice, just bracing himself, rest of the crew disagreeIt looks like Victor Radley is facing 3-4 weeks on the sidelines for his attempted charge down gone wrong.
But golden child Nathan Cleary apparently has no case to answer after what was basically a textbook shoulder charge.
Because ... consistency
HoldenV8
Journey Man
With that one I have no problem either way. He did take out Kelly's legs in an awkward attempt at a charge down. But at the same time hey wasn't trying to injure the guy.
But how Cleary gets off scott free from what was a clear cut shoulder charge is beyond me. If the situation had been reversed and Bird had hit Cleary with a shoulder charge, you'd have had the media and people like Andrew Johns screaming blue murder about protecting the play makers. Just look at the reaction when CHN hit Hughes on Thursday. If that same hit had been on a forward like Asofa-Solomona, no one would have batted an eyelid.
HoldenV8
Journey Man
Shock horror ... one of Penrith's legends defending the only player that can land Penrith a GF win right now.
I think their level of excellence if you like is built around borderline filth in everything they do, the way they play is not in the spirit of the game, they've never cared about the damage they do to opposition players, the Slater feet to the head of scorers, Croker and his putrid 'tackle' on Snake in the 07 decider, the Hughes knees to the head of Garrick and a plethora of unsportsmanlike performances all designed to win games at any cost and the officials take a week of Sundays to counteract the filth invented by Bellamy to gain advantage, they've changed the game and the spirit with which it's always been played and for me they're a blight on the game I've loved
Is anyone else over Anasta and his fkn rooster bias
Perspective time ...
Manly players like Les Boyd and Mal Reilly were two of the biggest thugs and showed no spirit or mercy for the opposition as they inflicted PAIN
Also Bucknell broke Sattlers jaw to three pieces when he king hit him from behind .
What Is my take on that ? He should have decapitated the bastards head off !!!
Downward pressure is only needed if the ball is already on the ground. And there's nothing in the rules about control. In fact the notes to the rules state A try should not be disallowed because the player who correctly grounds the ball fails to retain it.
Saab's was a fair try (and a brilliant effort!)
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
7 | 6 | 1 | 99 | 14 |
|
7 | 6 | 1 | 54 | 14 |
|
7 | 5 | 2 | 36 | 12 |
|
8 | 5 | 2 | 39 | 11 |
|
8 | 5 | 3 | 64 | 10 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | 49 | 10 |
|
8 | 4 | 4 | 73 | 8 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | 17 | 8 |
|
8 | 4 | 4 | -14 | 8 |
|
8 | 4 | 4 | -16 | 8 |
|
8 | 4 | 4 | -60 | 8 |
|
8 | 3 | 4 | 17 | 7 |
|
8 | 3 | 5 | -25 | 6 |
|
7 | 2 | 5 | -55 | 6 |
|
8 | 3 | 5 | -55 | 6 |
|
7 | 1 | 6 | -87 | 4 |
|
7 | 1 | 6 | -136 | 4 |
