A convincing 16 point win for the Broncos in an all-Queensland affair, but the elimination final wasn’t without controversy.
Kahu breaks 15-year record
Jordan Kahu is perhaps the most underrated player at the Broncos, and he now holds the record for most points scored in a final by a Brisbane Broncos player.
His two tries and six goals for a total of 20 points beats Wendell Sailor’s four tries against the Dragons in the 2001 semi-final, and Corey Parker’s eight goals against the Knights in 2006.
Titans struggle without Taylor
Ash Taylor’s kicking game was on point with the Titans’ first three tries coming as a result of crafty kicks from their rookie. But late in the first half Taylor copped a nasty knock from Andrew McCullough – Taylor tried to go on but was substituted shortly after and took no further part in the game.
Broncos to come under scrutiny
Two incidents caught the attention of social media but didn’t catch the eye of the officials. The first was James Roberts kicking the back of Ryan Simpkins, and Corey Parker also landed a cheeky headbutt.
Hayne drops the game
The Titans had worked hard to get in front going into the break, they were undefeated this season when in front at half time.
It took just one possession for the game to turn on its head, with Jarryd Hayne dropping the ball off the kickoff.
The Titans finished with a 2-4 record since signing Hayne, one that will certainly be scrutinised.
The referees
Some have labled it the worst officiated game they have seen. Perhaps unfair in some regards considering that whether or not we agree, by the rule book you can’t kick the ball out of someone’s hands to stop a try (thank Billy Slater).
But there were some stinkers, firstly not penalising Roberts or missing the kick was a poor one, and the Bunker reversing a call on the Titans after it looked like they were going to get a scrum 10 metres out.
The Corey Oates penalty called against David Mead for taking him out was arguably one of the worst calls made. What wasn’t liked about it was that the Bunker had the opportunity to overrule and call a knock on, but didn’t.
The most disappointing thing about it all is that Tony Archer will come out and back his men, despite most of the Rugby League community being up in arms about the performance.
Ken
Guest
Storm got 50/50 calls ? Your kidding yourself ,the calls were even in that game ,the Broncos game was a disgrace against the Titans and I'm not bagging the Broncos I'm bagging the diabolical refereeing .Im a storm supporter so I don't go for either team ,but mate if every other supporter is saying the refereeing in that game was unfair and Broncos supporters are saying no they were fine than we will agree to disagree .
The Barry
Roar Guru
Haha - fair point, it does stick in my craw to quote Archer. However the fact the ultimate apologist for the referees couldn't find any way to support the whistleblowers on that decision speaks volumes. I've said it plenty of times - the Broncs were clearly better and they deserved the win. But that decision was a howler.
Jara W
Guest
His Holiness Tony Archer said that did he? Suppose I best change my testimony then. Wouldn't want to get offside with the whole rugby league community ;)
Nat
Roar Guru
John Hoppa - On the field?
Nat
Roar Guru
Oh Barry, usually you're quite informed but this comment is just dumb. Focus the camera on EVERY scrum and you'll find a headbutt. Kicking someone in the head - only the grubby dogs.
Doogs
Guest
I would not say the Channel 9 commentary team are haters. They admire good play. However the are biased towards anybody playing the Broncos or Cowboys. Not a consipiracy. Just a fact. I understand it. NSW have not had a lot to cheer about in the last decade. They would be desperate for a change. Would that be fair comment The Barry? The same would happen with QLD commentators if they were not winning. Us Aussies are probably the biggest whingers on the planet and we have surpassed the Poms (with all due respect).
Doogs
Guest
I think it is all a bit tongue-in-cheek from Parker Barry. You are not a fool and could probably see that
Doogs
Guest
sorry Eaglejack. You are wrong. But speculation is fun isn't it. Especially wild accusations. Roberts has been charged. Bennett is not alone. All coaches are spin doctors. Nobody excluded. I am a Broncos fan but Roberts should be charged. I have no idea what he was thinking. I am also a Cowboys fan but wondered at the judgement of Feldt tonight when he gave away the penalty. Also I can't stand certain Sharks players but I felt they were superb today. So I am not one-eyed by any stretch but it seems you decided Roberts would get off which is not the case.
Doogs
Guest
yes i would say clutching at straws but that is just me. I felt the 50/50 calls went to the Broncos. Watched Storm vs Cowboys tonight and 50/50 went to Storm particularly the knock-ons. Agenda? Not really. Just home ground advantage. Broncos were in last year's grand final. Before that is was 2006. I can't stand Cronulla but I can take my blinkers off and appreciate when they play well. As they did today. The Broncos were doing terribly a few weeks back. Just dreadful. Was the NRL holding their hand. I don't mind if you don't like them, that is up to you but this conspiracy BS is plain boring
rod pombart
Guest
That has too be the worst performance of match officials that i can remember. It was so bad you did have to wonder if it was deliberate. No I will not buy into a conspiracy theory, but bloody hell they make it hard.I do not follow either of the two teams involved, I cheer for The Bulldogs I am absolutely disgusted by that refereeing. Yes the refs made mistakes that favored the Titans but it was the blatant errors that influenced the run of play in favor of the Broncos
Matth
Guest
I'm pretty sure people have done plenty worse than that over the years
Craig
Guest
If you watch the kick, his knee actually thrusts forward more than the foot. It kind of looks like he's trying to knee him but misses and the foot drags through. No force in it, deserved to be a penalty. Maybe a week. The mead penalty was ridiculous. There was a similar one in the storm game tonight which was equally ridiculous.
Craig
Guest
There is....what are you talking about? https://m.nrl.com/when-can-the-bunker-intervene/tabid/10959/contentid/839438/default.aspx
Geoff from Bruce Stadium
Guest
Wow is this argument still going? This game certainly has a few people fired up. I've got one more thing to add to the Oates/Mead incident. With the score being what it was at the time - I think it was 28-18 in favour of the Broncos at the 60 minute mark - the Titans had to score to stay in the game. What possible reason would Mead have to take Oates out and give away a penalty? That would be the action of a side defending a 10 point lead! Mead had every intention of catching the ball and the turn around and hope to score a try. Oates just happened to out-jump Mead by half a metre and then crashed over the top of him.
The Barry
Roar Guru
"the rule text above is clear, you say tackle as opposed to touch the player in mid air - you are incorrect - please admit it and move on" In the rule text you provided I count the word "tackle" appearing three times (including in the title of the actual rule). I count the word "touch" appear zero times. How am I incorrect when the actual RULE itself refers to tackle three times and mentions your TOUCH theory not once. WTF is it you want me to admit to? "Once the defending player leaps, the only contest that can happen is if the attacking player leaps as well" but that's not what the rule says. Again, the RULE doesn't say the attacker has to leap as well - you've completely made that up. What the rules actually say (as opposed to your interpretation) is that the chaser is not allowed to tackle the catcher...and Mead didn't attempt to tackle Oates at all. I agree that there are dangerous ones where the chasing player takes out the catcher and the rule is good. But it wasn't this tackle. Mead went for the ball 100%. He never took his eyes off the ball and would have caught it but for Oates' intervention. I guess we're never going to agree on that but I'll say it again, the fact that only Broncos fans are supporting it should tell you something. You're right, I think Archer is a clown, but he's a clown because he blindly supports the refs and comes up with any old garbage to justify their decisions. Regardless of what you or I think of him, the fact he's come out and said the refs made a mistake means it must be an absolutely, unjustifiable, undeniable howler, otherwise he'd have been playing the same old script that the refs got it right. It's pretty lame to call people who disagree with you stupid, particularly when you're inventing your own rule interpretations that even Archer can't justify.
The EYE-BALL Opinion
Roar Pro
As for using Archer to support your argument - have you not argued elsewhere your opinion of Archer ... please ... you are gasping and the air up there stinks.
The EYE-BALL Opinion
Roar Pro
No need to be 'The Barry' - the rule states: Mid-air tackle 1. (b) It is illegal to tackle an opposing player attempting to field a kick whilst the player is in mid-air. The catcher must have returned to the ground before being tackled. (See Section 5.).Applies only when a player on the non-kicking team catches the ball on the full. Given the position Oates was put in because Mead took his legs out from the ground - does not matter if he was trying to catch the ball ... once the defending player leaps, the only contest that can happen is if the attacking player leaps as well in a fair contest ... There was a no-contest play on Waqa [Storm Winger] two seasons ago that fair dinkum look like he broke his neck when the attacking player moved through the line of the ball and took Waqa's legs from under him. This is just dangerous play and when someone is seriously injured - i.e. Yow-Ye when coming down after leaping for the ball in his own goal line when the attacking player is just there to harass the leaping player - I'd send them off - That defensive player leaping only has eyes for the ball and if he is expecting the opposition to leave him alone unless someone else leaps to contest, any attacking player anywhere nead the leap and not leaping to contest IMO should be instantly penlalised, given last nights result should be put on report. The Rule text above is clear, you say tackle as opposed to touching the player in mid-air - you are incorrect Mr Barry - please have the metal to admit it and move on.
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
But he wasn't contesting the player. He was contesting the ball. He was trying to put himself in a position to catch the ball as he couldn't contest it by jumping for it.
The Barry
Roar Guru
And even Tony Archer the ultimate defender and excuse maker for the refs admitted today that decision was incorrect...
The Barry
Roar Guru
Sorry I'm confused Eye-ball. Who is having the "emotional response proving stupidity" - the Broncos fan incensed at the suggestion his team has been given the rub of the green or the dispassionate neutral supporter who watched the game for what it was? I don't know why you've attributed any of my responses as being emotional. My team wasn't playing, I didn't have a bet on the game, none of my favourite players involved. I couldn't be less emotionally involved in this if I wanted to be. It's Broncos supporters that are emotionally involved. Your little explanation of "any contact with the player in the air is a penalty" is fine and dandy, except that's not what the rule says. The rule speaks specifically of it being an offence to "tackle" a player fielding a kick in mid air. The actual rule says nothing at all about "any contact in the air is a penalty". And Mead did not, in any way, shape or form attempt to tackle Oates while he was in midair. He was watching the ball the whole way and it would have landed in his arms if Oates hadn't of come up with his play. The fact he and Oates collided is not evidence that Mead was trying to tackle him. It was a dud call and the fact that only Broncos fans are supporting it should tell you something.