- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined June 2016
0
Views
0
Published
352
Comments
Published
Comments
Wow, three tries disallowed because they were not actually tries.
I assume the Young knock forward was the one he touched it while on a line, maybe the 30 metre line, and then Tedesco caught the ball more than two metres behind the line. Backwards is the new forward apparently.
Sea Eagles rock Roosters to show they're the real deal in 2024 - with a little help from Bunker's blurred tunnel vision
Didn’t it go up as no try, and it wasn’t a try either. Not sure why you have a problem with the bunkers call.
Sea Eagles rock Roosters to show they're the real deal in 2024 - with a little help from Bunker's blurred tunnel vision
That game had one hell of a one sided penalty count…
Sea Eagles rock Roosters to show they're the real deal in 2024 - with a little help from Bunker's blurred tunnel vision
You should scroll through the replay (back and forwards if necessary) – it is on the Roar website. The ball lands in line with the leg stump, then travels on to hit the pad still on leg stump – it is almost travelling exactly straight, just moving a miniscule bit to the leg side.
There was no dudding, it was out.
'The technology has gone wrong': Stokes laments DRS in England defeat amid LBW drama
I thought out of Harrison, Edmed and Donaldson that Harrison definitely looked the best of the bunch when they all came onto the scene. The massive injuries to Harrison were a major setback, but if he can get back to where he was I reckon he will be the best option for 10.
As you said “He has a beautiful left boot and laser like radar off the tee.”. He also looked like a committed defender and willing to take on the line. I think Australian teams should stop making players a utility and let them specialize in one position and Harrison should specialize as a 10.
'A really even battle': Tahs' No.10 jersey wide open after Donno's departure, Jorgo on track for Super start
They are getting rid of JWH, Keary, Tupou and Suaalii, and probably Tedesco at the end of 2024. Angus Crichton will probably go as well. I think that counts as a few stars leaving.
But keep pushing your deluded conspiracy theories based on nonsense.
Smart Signings: The Roosters do need a winger - but is Nawaqanitawase what they are looking for?
I know he has his haters but Mitchell Pierce was a very good player and had a pretty good career. He was super competitive and always gave 100%.
Pearce polarising to the end of eventful career but questions linger for a precocious talent burdened by great expectations
The problem about sending WIghton off was there was zero evidence he actually make a biting action in any way at all. The cameras captured the incident and at no time did it look like Wighton attempted a bite.
The fact there was teeth marks on Gamble’s arm is circumstantial and not evidence that Wighton did anything wrong.
It is like saying if a player is knocked out in a tackle it is an automatic send off of the tackler even if there is no evidence the tackler did anything wrong or made any contact with the head – that would be ridiculous.
NRL Finals Talking Points: Hard to send a player off for biting, Knights on a roll but Panthers vs Broncos GF looks inevitable
As a Roosters fan I should be cheering at the prospect that WIghton might get a long suspension, but really, I might have not seen every angle but it didn’t look like Wighton made any biting action at all. I agree that Gamble was shoving his forearm as hard as he could into Wightons mouth and the cynic in me might say he did it deliberately to then make the accusation.
NRL Finals Talking Points: Hard to send a player off for biting, Knights on a roll but Panthers vs Broncos GF looks inevitable
Let’s be clear, the high shot on Suaalli was horrible. It was incredibly late, Suaalli had already knocked on and then retrieved the ball, so the ball was dead. Then Graham came from 5 metres away at speed and used a swinging arm, with force directly to Suaalli’s head whilst he was lying on the ground. It was orders of magnitude worse than the low force hit by Walker.
The hit on Smith was also a lot worse than the Walker one, it was high force shoulder to Smith’s cheekbone.
Suaalii was rubbed out of the game and Smith had to go for a HIA because they were high force, nasty hits. The Walker one was low force and had zero impact on the Cronulla player.
If you want to talk about sin bins, the hit on Smith should have been yellow, the hit on Suaalli should have been straight red. If Victor Radley had done the same hit as the one Graham did on Suaalii you can guarantee it would have been a straight red card without even a replay.
ANALYSIS: Redemption for Walker as Roosters lose Manu, Suaalii and Teddy - but pull off all-time epic finals win
I think for head contact, the actual force of the contact to the head does matter. There was no injury at all because the force to the head was not actually that big.
Not saying it wasn’t a bad and reckless tackle, just that there have been many worse tackles this season that were not send offs.
ANALYSIS: Brown sent off for horror high shot but backline fires Roosters to victory over Manly
“Brown’s tackle was an absolute shocker
Just watched it again. He races out recklessly, leaves his feet and launches into Burbo, hitting him straight in the head with his shoulder. Burbo wasn’t falling, didn’t come off the ball, etc”
That really is a gross exaggeration, it was a bad tackle technique wise but the Manly player was not hurt, stunned or affected in any way from the tackle. It looked spectacular but he impact with the head was not actually a really forceful impact – which is why the Manly player was completely fine. The majority of the impact was body on body.
ANALYSIS: Brown sent off for horror high shot but backline fires Roosters to victory over Manly
They have to move on either Keary or Walker, and get a bigger bodied five eight who has a big boot. It’s a tough call that has to be made.
Also, if Radley can’t play the ball playing lock/second five eight role (which he is actually very good at) because he just wants to try smashing people, he should probably go as well.
ANALYSIS: Chooks cooked after Storm defeat sees season all but over - and Radley and JWH escape bans
As much as Walker does some angry man silly nonsense, he is a great player. The exact same could be said of Munster as well.
He really should have played more State of Origins, despite being a Souths player 🙂
ANALYSIS: Cody Walker stole the show in Origin III - so why didn't Freddie pick him earlier?
“Whilst this seems a pointless to and fro with someone who obviously doesn’t understand physics, cricket, catching, logic or laws, throwing the ball in the air, as is often what fielders do, is seen as control of the body, ball and its further disposal. The rest of your hypotheticals are a nonsense.”
The irony of you saying that after your comments is so funny, I’m not sure if you are serious or just having a laugh.
Aussies have nothing to apologise for over Bairstow's blunder: England lost because they played Blaséball
“Throwing the ball in the air is control of your body.” – why? By who’s definition?
You certainly can’t just throw the ball in the air and let it hit the ground when you are near the boundary rope. All these types of definitive statement are nonsense.
Who says the fielder wouldn’t of tripped over and dropped the ball if they hadn’t thrown it is the air? Control of your body is completely undefined and is basically a nonsense conception.
Aussies have nothing to apologise for over Bairstow's blunder: England lost because they played Blaséball
Frankly i don’t care what the rule is, or what the interpretation is. What is important is consistency. It can’t be not out when Starc does it and out when everyone else does it.
This new interpretation of ‘in control of your body’ could mean anything. Every catch from now on is going to have to be judge completely differently basis from now on.
If you throw the ball up in the air to celebrate a catch while you are still running, are you in control of your body” if you haven’t come to a complete stop, maybe you would have just kept running until you ran in to the boundary fence if you hadn’t thrown the ball up to celebrate. Therefore, not out.
Aussies have nothing to apologise for over Bairstow's blunder: England lost because they played Blaséball
I sorry, but the batsmen does not lose his balance playing his shot in any way whatsoever – that is just a lie – regardless of it being in slow motion. Play it at any speed the reality is the same.
The batsman does a textbook leave – pausing with his bat in the air well away from the delivery. When he stupidly thinks the ball is dead, he lazily brings his bat down and while doing so leaves his crease. He is not going for any advantage and wrongly thinks the play is over and the ball is dead.
Aussies have nothing to apologise for over Bairstow's blunder: England lost because they played Blaséball
“The batsman is balancing forward with one foot back in the crease. Good work by Bairstow he waits till the batsman overbalances.” – That is completely false. The batsman stays steady for a long time in a frozen position. Only when he thinks the ball is dead does he relax and go to move back into the crease into a more comfortable position. His foot raises for a second as he is repositioning inside his crease.
Your concept of him overbalancing is completely false. The batsmen was just lazy and incompetent not looking at the keeper first and staying in his crease – exactly like Bairstow.
Aussies have nothing to apologise for over Bairstow's blunder: England lost because they played Blaséball
But Carey could not of been seeking an advantage that you say does not exist – therefore your argument falls down.
You are having your cake and eating it too, that is why your reasoning fails.
COMMENT: Cummins failed the moral test and tarnished these Ashes. He had the chance to be a legend and blew it
Are you actually serious? There is plenty of footage and English players such as Monty Panesar openly admitted it in detail.
The fact that they did it is not disputed by anyone including many of the English players who were playing at the time.
My comments were straight from the English players mouths, literally.
I’ll add another link like the one above monty-panesar-ball-tampering-england
Welcome to the real world of English cricket.
COMMENT: Cummins failed the moral test and tarnished these Ashes. He had the chance to be a legend and blew it
The English team for years used mints to shine the ball, they selected specific sunscreens that they had determined gave the ball the most shine and used them on the ball, they used zippers to deliberately scuff the ball. They did all of those for many years. That is at least as bad as sandpaper for one, possibly two games.
Sandpaper was dumb, beyond dumb, so dumb I don’t actually know the words to accurately describe it.
The point I was making is that it was hardly ever used, it was so dumb it got caught instantly and was stopped instantly. The English, including Broad and Anderson ball tampered for much of their whole carriers. Which one is worse in your eyes? Should they be banned for life? Maybe have their wickets removed from the record books?
The reality is the penalty for blatant ball tampering is a one week ban. The ‘lucky they didn’t get a life ban’ is so ridiculous. You can’t ban one person for life for doing something that everyone else gets a one game ban.
COMMENT: Cummins failed the moral test and tarnished these Ashes. He had the chance to be a legend and blew it
The sandpapegate is so overrated – for one they got caught instantly and it never had an effect.
But mostly because teams like England, including Broad and Anderson had been ball tampering with mints, sunscreen and zippers for most of their careers. This has been said by the English players that they were playing with as well as video footage. This is known to have swung series to their favour and includes a lot of the wickets they have taken.
The level of cheating by Broad and Anderson through ball tampering is so many orders of magnitude than sandpapergate.
Let’s actually have some perspective here.
COMMENT: Cummins failed the moral test and tarnished these Ashes. He had the chance to be a legend and blew it
The ball was not dead – so there is no sound argument it was dead, it simply wasn’t dead in any way whatsoever.
You could argue a moral argument – but since the English had already done the same thing there is no moral argument to have, unless you think only English teams can do it and Australian team are banned from doing it – that is one twisted moral argument.
COMMENT: Cummins failed the moral test and tarnished these Ashes. He had the chance to be a legend and blew it
I’m not saying it changed the result but it was such a dumb call by the bunker.
It wasn’t only that Edwards had no chance of stopping the try, it was that Edwards wasn’t running towards the play, he was running towards the in goal just so he could make contact with JWH. Have a look at the video, JWH is already in the in goal when contact is made. If Edwards kept running his line he would of ended up running over the dead ball line before getting anywhere near where Manu was.
The worst thing was it was such a great try by Manu, taken away.
NRL News: 'Would have scored regardless' - Annesley's take on dodgy obstruction as Robbo refuses to blame Bunker