Melbourne Storm vs Canterbury Bulldogs: NRL live scores, blog

Phelpsy, not sure if anyone got back to you regarding this. A 40/20 is where an attacking team kicks the ball from inside their own 40m line, and it goes into touch (over the sideline), but not on the full, at or beyond the attacking 20m line. If such an attempt is successful, then the attacking side gets a scrum feed, as opposed to the defending team, as would normally be the case. Cronk has a habit of attempting 40/20s early in a set of six, to try and catch wingers unawares. It has proven successful in the past, and, as stated elsewhere, can result in the long term benefit of the wingers being reluctant to stay up too far, which gives the attacking side more room to move around the edges. Hope that helps.

Full disclosure, I am a Dogs supporter so hopefully this doesn't sound too bias. Slater's foot made contact with Kelmmer's throat. There is no way to show that Klemmer would have made the tackle while Slater was in the air. He was more than likely going to be waiting until Slater lands to complete the tackle. Admittedly, there is no way to show this either. So it all comes back to Slater's foot making contact with Klemmer's throat. I would hope (although I sometimes am a bit sceptical about 'accidental' contact made by some Melbourne players) that Slater didn't do this intentionally, however it was reckless. To those who say he was just protecting himself from illegal contact he thought was going occur, I will give you another scenarion. How would it be any different if Klemmer a couple of minutes later, Klemmer were to take a hit up and, under the impression that he was going to be hit high, raise an elbow and make contact with a defender's head?

You are kidding right?..why don't you watch the replay again and again, where in the footage do you see Klemmer getting anywhere near Slater?..how long is Slater's leg?..at least a metre in length? fully extended, how the hell can Klemmer even get close to him?..Just because everybody would love to think that Klemmer was running in to tackle, the more likely scenario would have been Klemmer was waiting for Slater to land then tackle him, why would anybody think differently?..what next? you're gonna say Klemmer should have been charged for using his face to strike Slater's boot?..

Disagree. Unusual , I don't seem to recall a sport for that matter, a need other than Slater protecting the radius with an extended leg while in the air that requires such a technique. In regards to his vintage you would think given his football sense he's well aware of the damage it can cause. I don't believe the defending player would have conceded a penalty,these guys have acute awareness & the ability to adjust their momentum.

Fully agree with you turbodewd. Cam Smith had a legit argument about the incident as well. If he never wentup for the tackle, then Slater's foot would have never got him. Then it led to a try. Pathetic refereeing. That try that Cronk also "scored" and disallowed for obstruction was utter bull! I'm over these pathetic rule changes. Back to Slater though. He does and has done the exact same thing every single game. Not exactly his fault! And I hate Melbourne by the way!

He actually got him in the throat and be it a pro-active means of deflection or an aggressive strike on an opposing player, he did extend the leg towards an advancing player striking him with the soul of his foot prior to any contact made by the advancing player. It is not a good look for the game. However the rest of the game fantastic, crowd of just shy of 12,000 would be a little disappointing though I would have thought particularly as AFL main season has not started yet.

Only coz the tackler tried an illegal tackle on him...

The ref seems to show Smith so much more respect than Ennis. Wether or not he deserves more respect is a story for another day, but both captains should be treated equally. Refs were happy to chat for a minute to Smith about their decisions, but Ennis was told in 5 seconds just to bugger off.

I dont care why he does it, but you shouldnt be able to lift your feet up like that. It is dangerous play and it does not allow any other players to compete for the ball as they will get a boot to the face.

Why? Kicked a guy in the head! Oh sorry hes not that sort of player

I thought the Dogs played well but there line speed was non existant and allowed the Storm to constantly march the ball within striking distance from deep in there own half.

Why? He was everywhere tonight. Top class performance. One minuscule indiscretion should not work against him.

Slater Man of the Match, you are kidding????? Even if you don't agree with the penalty, the fact there is a question over it surely puts him out of the running.

I thought before the game the Storm might show signs of fatigue. They certainly were caught napping at the end. While the Dogs will be happy to get so close with key players out, I'm sure Des would still be bitterly disappointed. It was the perfect night to meet the Storm. But all in all a great game by 2 premiership heavyweights.

Some game! Bulldogs will be a force to be reckoned with when they get some key troops back. Shame about that obstruction ruling on the Cronk try though, that was pretty rubbish. And after some talk during the week about switching the clock off in dead ball situations, those last 30 seconds should definitely fuel the discussion, would have been great to see the Doggies have one more crack.

Good game. Ref actually made it exciting by making it a close game in the end.