Cross-Forum-Discussion Round 24 Cross Forum Chat

[BroncosHQ.com]

"Awww you softcock" from the crowd hahah

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Dragons are just so static, no one in motion and nothing to guess.

Back to the AFL.

How good were those giants though

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Hunts not great under pressure sometimes.

Yeah, we know.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Shout out to Klese Haas for supporting his dropkick brother in jail with a touching try celebration or was it dead**** mother. Not a ****ing braincell between the lot of them. Glad they can play footy.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Shout out to Klese Haas for supporting his dropkick brother in jail with a touching try celebration or was it for his dead**** mother. Not a ****ing braincell between them.

Interesting stuff too about this bloke. Had a few Titans fans tell me he is only getting a go because of his brother and he is an absolute spud. Thought I would dig deeper

Penrith game today - 3 runs for 58m in 53mins. One of his stronger efforts.

Round 9 - 4 runs for 37m in 28mins
Round 10 - 3 runs for 30m in 32mins
Round 11 - 0 runs for 0m in 29mins
Round 12 - 3 runs for 14m in 31mins
Round 14 - 5 runs for 54m in 80mins
Round 15 - 6 runs for 43m in 80mins
Round 19 - 6 runs for 38m in 85mins
Round 20 - 1 run for 7m in 80mins
Round 21 - 9 runs for 75m in 80mins really put in this week

Round 22 - 2 runs for 20m in 21mins
Round 23 - 0 runs for 0m in 15mins
Round 24 - 1 runs for 2m in 15mins

A whopping average of 3.31 carries a game in 48mins per for an average of...... 29m per game

Funniest **** I have ever seen. Has to be a record for doing **** all

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

From the rule book:
“Careless” indicates that the player has not exercised due caution in making a play. “Reckless” means that the player has made unnatural movements designed to intimidate an opponent or to gain an unfair advantage.

The tackler has even admitted he was careless, and has apoligized. It wasn't intentional, but all careless tackles are unintentional. This careless tackle also became a dangerous one and could have crippled Garrick.
It is forgeable to be a biased supporter but your defence of this tackle being OK is childish.

It doesn't come down to whether there was a careless or reckless action.

It comes down to whether the player ended up in a dangerous position. He lands on his back, so no he doesn't.

How can they blow a penalty when CNK doesn't break a single rule? What were people hoping they would penalize? Taking out the legs? There's no rule against that. The way he lands? He lands on his back, in every other tackle when a player lands on their back it's play on. You can't have it both ways.

There was nothing illegal in that tackle.

It should be pointed out that if you look at the tackle closely, you can see Garrick turn his body when he jumps. That contributes a great deal to the way it ended up. It stops CNK from getting him front on and the tackle ending up just a regular tackle.

If you're going to bring up what the players said, Garrick said it was all good. Just something that happens.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Round 11 - 0 runs for 0m in 29mins
Round 20 - 1 run for 7m in 80mins

Surely not.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Surely not.

I've checked, its true. Crazy. He did make a decent amount of tackles though

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Surely not.

Yep. Seems impossible.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Did Benji actually coach the Tigers this week, because I though Sheens was meant to be remaining as coach for the last 3 games this year.

I didn't watch the whole match, but i only saw Benji in the box. he also took the press conference

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Did Benji actually coach the Tigers this week, because I though Sheens was meant to be remaining as coach for the last 3 games this year.

I didn't watch the whole match, but i only saw Benji in the box. he also took the press conference

Yeah, Benji was coach. Sheens bailed out early.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

For the fans!

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Protected species

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Hands up if you're surprised. It was more of a hip drop than 90% of those charged as hip drops.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

That is absolute bull****. Textbook hip drop and if old mate was injured, JFH would be sitting out for a month. This whole "the injury determines the charge" is ****ed in the head, it should not be considered at all. If an action is illegal, it's illegal whether it injures someone or not.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

No one is surprised man. There is one rule for the Panthers, NAS and JWH and another rule for everyone else.

 

[The Who]

It doesn't come down to whether there was a careless or reckless action.

It comes down to whether the player ended up in a dangerous position. He lands on his back, so no he doesn't.

How can they blow a penalty when CNK doesn't break a single rule? What were people hoping they would penalize? Taking out the legs? There's no rule against that. The way he lands? He lands on his back, in every other tackle when a player lands on their back it's play on. You can't have it both ways.

There was nothing illegal in that tackle.

It should be pointed out that if you look at the tackle closely, you can see Garrick turn his body when he jumps. That contributes a great deal to the way it ended up. It stops CNK from getting him front on and the tackle ending up just a regular tackle.

If you're going to bring up what the players said, Garrick said it was all good. Just something that happens.

OK. You've stated your case well. Congratulations; it's a debate worth having. I still argue that Garrick was put in a dangerous position. During every RL match you see penalties for innocuous tackles which don't have the potential capacity to injure their opponent. Garrick was hurt, and will probably not play again this season.

Let's see the reaction when it happens again and the player is from one of the NRL darling clubs, which includes yours, and/or the tackled player ends up missing a finals match or, worse still, ends up with a broken spine.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

OK. You've stated your case well. Congratulations; it's a debate worth having. I still argue that Garrick was put in a dangerous position. During every RL match you see penalties for innocuous tackles which don't have the potential capacity to injure their opponent. Garrick was hurt, and will probably not play again this season.

Let's see the reaction when it happens again and the player is from one of the NRL darling clubs, which includes yours, and/or the tackled player ends up missing a finals match or, worse still, ends up with a broken spine.

They should be changing the rule. It goes under the duty of care. They want to protect guys everywhere else. They have a rule for when a guy dives on a ball and is laying on the ground and a players just comes in and sumo flops on him as hard possible driving the shoulder in while he is doing it. You are right. If that is one of the big names and they break their back or get a long term injury it is changed within the week.

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

That Newcastle Jersey......

 

[BroncosHQ.com]

Ponga is so good.