1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

To beat Manly in a GF you must cheat

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by Fluffy, Oct 10, 2013.

  1. Fluffy

    Fluffy Well-Known Member

    17,768
    1,417
    Ratings:
    +3,624 / 132
    In the professional era we have not lost a grand final without some form of cheating involved.

    2013 - Refs cheating
    2007 - Storm cheating cap
    1997 - Newcastle players cheating on drugs
    1995 - Ref cheating
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Troll Troll x 1
  2. MadMarcus

    MadMarcus Local Lunatic 2016 Tipping Competitor

    5,528
    2,485
    Ratings:
    +5,817 / 53
    2013 Ref cheating, drug cheating and salary cap cheating... *alleged at this stage
     
  3. SeaEagleRock8

    SeaEagleRock8 Sea Eagle Lach Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    12,594
    3,523
    Ratings:
    +6,797 / 122
    We've never lost a single match without cheating involved. Ever. This is axiomatic.

    (Does make us look a bit like sore losers though) :D
     
  4. jbb/james

    jbb/james Well-Known Member

    1,705
    491
    Ratings:
    +885 / 21
    I hate the word cheat. There were some mistakes by the ref i get but the roosters just played what was in front of them.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  5. wedgetail eagle

    wedgetail eagle Well-Known Member

    1,874
    764
    Ratings:
    +1,727 / 10
    Mistakes by the Ref?
    Some mistakes?
     
  6. voicefromthehill

    voicefromthehill Well-Known Member Premium Member

    2,750
    774
    Ratings:
    +1,235 / 9
    Did the refs stop us tackling SBW when he made a bust? No
    Did the refs stop us knocking the ball dead prior to the Jennings try? No
    Did the refs make Wolfe drop the ball with the try line beckoning? No

    Surely we can recognise our own shortcomings in the match and acknowledge that
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. MadMarcus

    MadMarcus Local Lunatic 2016 Tipping Competitor

    5,528
    2,485
    Ratings:
    +5,817 / 53
    We didn't play the perfect game, but neither did they. The stats would suggest they had far more shortcomings than us.
     
  8. voicefromthehill

    voicefromthehill Well-Known Member Premium Member

    2,750
    774
    Ratings:
    +1,235 / 9
    Unfortunately the score board, and therefore history, will suggest otherwise
     
  9. MadMarcus

    MadMarcus Local Lunatic 2016 Tipping Competitor

    5,528
    2,485
    Ratings:
    +5,817 / 53
    Yes, thanks to the refs. That's the point.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. voicefromthehill

    voicefromthehill Well-Known Member Premium Member

    2,750
    774
    Ratings:
    +1,235 / 9
    So the refs were the cause of the points I raised?
     
  11. MadMarcus

    MadMarcus Local Lunatic 2016 Tipping Competitor

    5,528
    2,485
    Ratings:
    +5,817 / 53
    No, the refs are not responsible for our mistakes. They are responsible for not making the Roosters pay for theirs, and the Roosters made more mistakes than us, so the way the refs handled them was the difference in the end. Simples.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  12. voicefromthehill

    voicefromthehill Well-Known Member Premium Member

    2,750
    774
    Ratings:
    +1,235 / 9
    I disagree, I don't believe it was the difference, I count three tries to the roosters that were scored fair and square , so we are left with even scores, that then means we are then left with hypotheticals so at best it is level scores Not so simples.

    It is what it is, we can't undo it. I am curious to see if any of the people screaming "cheat" contributed to he derision of Henry and Thurston.....
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. HoldenV8

    HoldenV8 Well-Known Member

    6,552
    1,852
    Adelaide
    Ratings:
    +6,740 / 125
    I can't say the Chooks cheated on Sunday. Like any good team should, they just took advantage of the opportunities they were given.

    Maria may have headbutted Justin Horo, but he didn't make the call to let it go and penalise Manly for "holding down". Pearce may have had a hand in there when Foz was trying to play the ball, but it wasn't Pearce who blew the whistle for a knock on. Jennings may have got a boot to the ball before it went into touch, but he didn't make the call to give the Chooks the scrum feed. Manloney may have thrown a forward pass to Mini, but he wasn't the one who ignored it and then blew the whistle for a try. Jake Friend may have tackled DCE late after he got a kick away, but it wasn't his call to ignore it.

    Those calls were made by Shayne Hayne.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  14. Lord Eagleton

    Lord Eagleton Well-Known Member

    1,259
    528
    Ratings:
    +835 / 24
    Im sorry bud, but this kind of talk kills me. We were playing what was in front of us but the ref wasnt giving us the same chance that he was giving the roosters. We didnt have the chance to advance on the opportunities we made. Hence the refs are *** CHEATS.
     
  15. Hamster Huey

    Hamster Huey Space Invader Premium Member

    1,828
    643
    Ratings:
    +990 / 7
    What was in front of them!!!! Yet another Manly defensive line due to some bull**** penalty? Or another line set after an incorrect handover of possession? Or perhaps it was a defence forced to make yet more tackles on the back of refs not picking up an infringement by them?

    All that was in front of the Roosters was a tiring Manly side that did everything right to stay in the contest, but were denied reward and possession over and over again.
    [hr]
    JT and Henry cried about a single incident early the in match as the basis for their loss. A big difference to our situation when pretty much from the moment Pearce wasn't pinged for a knock-on, we lost the 50-50 decisions by a large margin.

    Three of their tries were fair but how they were in a position to score some of them, is the point. Why did we found ourselves making at least 10% more tackles in the game when our efforts weren't rewarded, is the point.

    Our boys made some mistakes and that's an accepted part of the game...no team goes 80mins with perfection. But when you see very small error count and wonder how you got far less ball, that's the point!!!
     
    • Like Like x 3
  16. lsz

    lsz Well-Known Member Staff Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    6,618
    1,732
    Ratings:
    +3,647 / 66
    I think almost every team that has lost in a grand final could feel the same as we do...even some of the teams we have beaten in the past

    Off the top of my head you could argue

    Saints in 96 could argue that the decision to call play on against Ridge cost them the game
    Scum in 2008 could argue that the decision to suspend Smith cost them the title

    And i am sure there are some hard done by warriors fans out there
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. jbb/james

    jbb/james Well-Known Member

    1,705
    491
    Ratings:
    +885 / 21
    Hayne was incompetent I agree, but did he cheat. And who are you calling a cheat the roosters and Hayne, or both. So you believe he got paid to fix the result, or did he risk his job, family and livelihood for free just to give Manly the ****s

    I get your hurting but 3 weeks ago Hayne was cheating to get the bunnies home, and when they got knocked out he flipped to the chooks

    With the money on gambling I am not that naive that this couldnt happen. But wouldnt it have been better for the bookies If manly had or won. People chuck phrases around all the time and hayne had a number of shockers and probably shouldnt be considered anything but a low rank ref. I think this is more linked to his relationship with teams and captains. If we are honest jamie probably hassels the ref way too much on obvious calls so i suspect he gets a little less cred when he approaches the ref than some

    I think some people are hoping they get vindication for losing to help them deal with other opposing fans in their life
     
  18. MadMarcus

    MadMarcus Local Lunatic 2016 Tipping Competitor

    5,528
    2,485
    Ratings:
    +5,817 / 53
    You are right in that all we have to work with is hypotheticals. Those bad calls were so regular and influential it is impossible to know what the game would have been like without them.

    If the refs ruled that Pearce knocked on early in the match would we have scored?
    If the touchie ruled the ball came off Jennings foot and we had a crack at their line just before half time would we have scored?
    If the refs ruled Jennings obstructed Lyon and gave us a penalty would we have scored, having a whole set of 6 right on their line (instead they got the try which put them in the lead, so that's a possible 12 point turnaround)?
    If we weren't so tired from making so many extra tackles would we have been able to stop SBW's break, or stop Jennings' try?

    We will never know the answer to any of these questions (and dozens more), but you would have to it more likely than not that we would have converted at least 1 of the opportunities that were taken away from us.

    As the stats show we made less errors, had a higher completion rate and had less missed tackles my view is that we would have won if not for the poor decisions. To be honest I think we would have had it wrapped up by half time.

    Souths must be spewing that Hayne wasn't the ref for our match against them last week. It is another hypothetical, but I am sure that if he was the ref we would have lost so I suppose on 1 view we should count ourselves lucky.
     
  19. Aetna

    Aetna Active Member

    222
    46
    Ratings:
    +56 / 0
    What you have to understand is that the Sea Eagles were the better team in the Grand Final.
    http://m.nrl.com/news-display/how-roosters-defied-stats-to-win/75038
    The Roosters were rattled on the big stage, kicking out on the full, loosing the ball etc.
    Manly had the momentum. Well the ref made sure that momentum was taken from them to make it a evenly contested match by giving the Roosters possession & Manly having to continuesy defend in hot conditions. Those decision going the correct way would of meant the Roosters would of had no chance to re group & 18-8 would of been 24-0. The Roosters would of been tired from have to defend in the heat & Manly would of stream rolled them. There would of been no SBW break & no forward pass because he would of been run to the ground from all the tackling & there would of been no missed tackle from a tired Manly defense. The Roosters wouldn't of been targeting the wingers from kicks inside the Manly half but trying to kick long to get out of their territory.
    The Roosters couldn't finish their sets but instead of paying for their mistakes against a mistake free Manly team they were given piggy backs down field.
     
  20. Fluffy

    Fluffy Well-Known Member

    17,768
    1,417
    Ratings:
    +3,624 / 132
    Roosters scored 1 try in the set of 6 off a dodgy refs call so really its 3 tries to 2 in Manly's favour.

    Just because you cant change the outcome does not mean you should stick your head in the sand. All you are doing is vindicating the performance and encouraging it to happen again.

    Would you ignore a rape or murder after it has happened? Because you can't undo it?

    As for you Thurston and Henry question, I fully supported them being pissed off as I would have been. Sure they went a bit far but if they hadn't they wouldn't have got the attention they wanted.

    But if your plan is ignorance I really hope you are never in a position of power or influence.
    [hr]
    The B grade cricket commentators are even commenting on it in the domestic 1 day cricket

    Thats when you know its bad
     

Share This Page