1995

Little Grubber Kick said:
Didn't look 'well and truly tackled' to me, had momentum, was in front of Brown and running away, trying to hold onto him by the fingertips is hardly 'well and truly tackled'...

from approx. the 5:50 mark

and sorry to be a pain, but an incident in a different game from a different year 'nullifies' another incident.....FFS
Click to expand...
It's not rocker science...

A try is scored against you from a dodgy call that may or may not cost you a grand final...then the following year you score a try from a dodgy call that may or may not have cost the opposition a grand final...FFS yourself.
 
Little Grubber Kick said:
Didn't look 'well and truly tackled' to me, had momentum, was in front of Brown and running away, trying to hold onto him by the fingertips is hardly 'well and truly tackled'...

from approx. the 5:50 mark

and sorry to be a pain, but an incident in a different game from a different year 'nullifies' another incident.....FFS
Click to expand...
If you think what Brown did does not constitute a tackle, then you are entitled to your opinion, but you need glasses, and bad!
 
Snake said:
It's not rocker science...

A try is scored against you from a dodgy call that may or may not cost you a grand final...then the following year you score a try from a dodgy call that may or may not have cost the opposition a grand final...FFS yourself.
Click to expand...
Thanks for setting me straight, but so I'm absolutely sure about this now, for example those 14 bad decisions that were made in the various games last weekend (just saying for illustrative purposes), entitles each of those teams that were on the wrong end of those decisions to a bad decision in their favour at some time in the future, even if it's not against the same team....
Yeah GOT IT, not Rocker Science at all, just simple 2 wrongs make a right mentality.
 
The set of 6 after manly went up 18-8 in 2013. Bomb on the 5th, Jamie clearly shouldered out of the way by a defender who shielded the player who took the bomb. Should have been a penalty near the sticks, and 20-8, and we get the ball back.

Ref had already given manly a penalty try so was never going to blow another one for manly points.
 
Little Grubber Kick said:
Thanks for setting me straight, but so I'm absolutely sure about this now, for example those 14 bad decisions that were made in the various games last weekend (just saying for illustrative purposes), entitles each of those teams that were on the wrong end of those decisions to a bad decision in their favour at some time in the future, even if it's not against the same team....
Yeah GOT IT, not Rocker Science at all, just simple 2 wrongs make a right mentality.
Click to expand...
Here's something for illustrative purposes; it's a figure of speech and not meant to be taken so literally. You know... take the good with the bad type thing...I can't believe I have to spell this out haha.
 
This is the first Grand Final i can remember watching manly in. I also cried like a little girl when we lost @:cry:
 
Snake said:
Here's something for illustrative purposes; it's a figure of speech and not meant to be taken so literally. You know... take the good with the bad type thing...I can't believe I have to spell this out haha.
Click to expand...
Like I said I got it, can't believe I had to spell out how your wrong, but that's OK.
At least now I know that the 1997, 2013 GFs have us being owed 2 GF wins, yeehaa (but is it really the same as winning them fair and square?). Just one question, is there an expiry date on this 'nullifying'?
 
At the 1995 GF, I always felt the turning point was around the 60 minute mark, Manly made a massive break up the right hand side of the field, and the Dogs scrambled and denied us scoring. I reckon we would have gone with it if we scored at that point but it wasn't meant to happen.
 
I was near where the players ran out on GF day 1995.

As they ran out I turned to the mate I was sitting with and said " ****, they look as nervous as all buggery".

Don't know why, but despite the bad calls one team wanted it much more than the other on that day, and sadly that wasn't us!
 
fLIP said:
This is the first Grand Final i can remember watching manly in. I also cried like a little girl when we lost @:cry:
Click to expand...

TBH I was more shattered after the 1997 GF than I was in 1995. We were never really in the game against the Dogs, but we led all day against the Knights and really should have put them away in 97.

I still think that had Matthew Ridge stayed at Manly we would have walked it in in 1997.

And I still hate that blonde haired git Albert. Him and bargearse Johns......
 
HoldenV8 said:
TBH I was more shattered after the 1997 GF than I was in 1995. We were never really in the game against the Dogs, but we led all day against the Knights and really should have put them away in 97.

I still think that had Matthew Ridge stayed at Manly we would have walked it in in 1997.

And I still hate that blonde haired git Albert. Him and bargearse Johns......
Click to expand...

I hate McDougall more, how the **** that wasn't a sendoff that day is beyond me!!
 
Mark from Brisbane said:
I hate McDougall more, how the **** that wasn't a sendoff that day is beyond me!!
Click to expand...

And how the **** he got away with his positive drug test. Yes, I get that he has a medical condition and has to take synthetic testosterone - but that doesn't mean he should have had a free pass to take as much as he wanted! If anything, a guy who you KNOW is taking it should be constantly tested to make sure he stays within the allowable parameters; a 'positive' test for a naturally occurring hormone means his levels were WAAAY above normal. Which might explain the aggro face-stomping as well...
 
yokahontas said:
And how the **** he got away with his positive drug test. Yes, I get that he has a medical condition and has to take synthetic testosterone - but that doesn't mean he should have had a free pass to take as much as he wanted! If anything, a guy who you KNOW is taking it should be constantly tested to make sure he stays within the allowable parameters; a 'positive' test for a naturally occurring hormone means his levels were WAAAY above normal. Which might explain the aggro face-stomping as well...
Click to expand...
Should have been banned, plain and simple. The main quality of his game was his strength, oh.. er... der.!!! He was a drug-cheating Knight, correction, yet another drug-cheating Knight. The Knights are drug cheats, Sharks are drug cheats, Storm Dogs and Eels are salary cap cheats, Manly hasn't been caught yet for anything we are f***en innocent until proven guilty baby
 
If the events of 95,97 and 2013 happened to any other team it would have gone down in rugby league folklore. (because it was Manly, who gives a toss).
Would really like Sportsbet to include the '97 Knight's in the "put the roid in android" campaign. Most probably wouldn't appeal to McDougall at the moment as he is most probably rolling in it, but I'm sure Robbie O would be desperate for a quick buck.
 
In 1995 Canterbury also was over the salary cap. They took on Rod Silva from Easts mid season. The only way they could stay under the salary cap was they failed to register upgraded contracts to Jason Smith, Jim Dymock & Dean Pay. Bullfrog Moore admitted this in 1996. Silva played a vital role in the finals series. Like Melbourne, they should have been stripped of this title!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 432 (members: 12, guests: 420)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Online statistics

Members online
12
Guests online
420
Total visitors
432
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom