Manly v Warriors

[panash]

any news on choc injury ??

---

well said !!!! never knock a champion

---

Only had to wait 12 games, better not be 12 more or he will again justifiably be knocked.

---

He was coming back from a serious injury, he was always going to take a while to hit his straps. The criticisms of Gift were hilariously ridiculous.

---

Not sure how, guess it is because it is not your opinion. He is one of the highest paid players in the team and 2 months after returning from injury he was putting in performances that made Trex 2012 look like a superstar. We all knew he would eventually come good but in the process he has cost us probably 2-3 wins.

---

He cost us 2/3 games?? Lol... Didn't know he played any games by himself this season.

---

thats alittle harsh that he costs us 2-3 games....

missed tackles , bad discipline , lacking in attack doesnt help any football team as a whole...

considering our teams injuries , bad form at times , ref decisions
we are sitting 3rd , - i can live with that

 

[Brissie Kid]

Can someone explain what I missed with the David Gower double movement? I thought the Warriors knocked it on (didn't they?), and Gower moved only about two metres before the double movement? Why not a scrum feed to Manly - clearly no advantage to Manly - rather than a penalty against?

Can't be explained. Should have been a Manly scrum 10m out.

 

[Rex]

Can someone explain what I missed with the David Gower double movement? I thought the Warriors knocked it on (didn't they?), and Gower moved only about two metres before the double movement? Why not a scrum feed to Manly - clearly no advantage to Manly - rather than a penalty against?

Can't be explained. Should have been a Manly scrum 10m out.

A similar knock-on by Wests also resulted in a non-sensical decision against Manly. I thought they'd needed to advance at least ten metres for advantage to be non-retractible. Apparently one or two metres is enough now?

Similarly Choc toed through a Warriors knock-on. They dived on the ball and the knock-on was deemed reversed (advantage taken!). Manly clearly would have preferred the scrum from where the knock-on occurred.

There seems to have been a significant change in interpretation of when advantage is taken. Anyone know the new rule, if any?

 

[StuBoot]

Can someone explain what I missed with the David Gower double movement? I thought the Warriors knocked it on (didn't they?), and Gower moved only about two metres before the double movement? Why not a scrum feed to Manly - clearly no advantage to Manly - rather than a penalty against?

Can't be explained. Should have been a Manly scrum 10m out.

I'd hazard a guess that as we'd advanced the ball from the initial error that we'd "taken" our advantage - if he scores no prob but the double movement wipes it out again as it's not an error from us but a rule infringement hence the penalty. Fair enough I reckon.
Also, I think they've tweaked the advantage rule a bit too, a bit more discretion now.