If you were searching for a definitive list of everything that could go wrong with a rugby league club, the Bulldogs would be an excellent show-and-tell exemplar.
The board battles of the last 12 months, sacked coaches and legal disputes, salary cap issues and the loss of hero-worshipped club legends have alienated and disillusioned fans.
The 2018 season was pencilled in as a year of redemption, a return to the culture of years past and a time to rebuild. So far it has proven anything but. A scrappy win against the Panthers in Round 3 and a professional performance against the out of form Cowboys in Round 6 have been the only two successes for the blue and whites so far. Their run of losses has now stretched to three since that time.
Thursday night was far from an embarrassment, as has been the case in most of their matches to this point, yet once again the boys from Belmore came away with nothing.
The most disappointing things from a spectator’s point of view were the divots of turf taken out of the playing surface at Suncorp each time a player attempted to change direction.
It was in appalling condition and obvious as soon as Corey Oates took a simple pass and crossed the line unmarked for the second try of the match. As he stumbled and stubbed his toe, he produced one of many holes that saw the surface begin to resemble a fairway as opposed to a firm and fast Queensland football field.
The Broncos were sound with their sets of six and played a controlled game based on completions, and the Bulldogs were the polar opposite. Knock-ons at dummy-half, loose off-loads and ill-discipline had coach Dean Pay performing bizarre dance moves in the box.
However, somehow, after 40 minutes the Dogs led, mainly off the back of some luck via a Darius Boyd error. Boyd had a poor night, and a late first-half try saw the Dogs clear 14-6.
(Ashley Feder/Getty Images)
Predictably the Broncos came on strongly in the second period and levelled things up at 14-14 before another clumsy error at the back saw them fall behind once again. The resilient Broncos fought back and levelled at 20-20 with minutes remaining.
In the final moments a high Broncos kick was pushed dead by the Dogs, but Moses Mbye was adjudged to have impeded a chaser, was sin-binned and the penalty goal sealed the deal for Brisbane.
The Canterbury faithful were in full conspiracy mode before the game, citing referee Bernard Sutton’s record against them in matches and also noting his seemingly ‘friendly’ relationship with the Broncos. Now they were seething.
A dubious call on an apparent knock-on, a few piggyback penalties and a mighty good dressing down of acting captain David Klemmer had the fans accosting social media in fury.
Knowing the Bulldogs area well, I am certain there are a couple of ripper coffee shops along Leylands Parade in Belmore where the Dogs fans and Sutton could sit down together and smoke the peace pipe.
After all, it is only footy and the right thing to do.
(AAP Image/Dan Himbrechts)
The twilight Friday match at McDonald Jones Stadium saw two top-eight sides compete to remain in a finals position. The hunter was warming up for the other huge match this weekend, with the A-League grand final to be played tonight at the same venue.
The Rabbitohs went to Newcastle to further their reputation as a growing force, and further it they did – they put the Knights to the sword to the tune of 36-18. The Bunnies jumped the Knights early and skipped out to a 12-point lead before the Knights rallied and eventually pulled things back to enter the sheds at half-time trailing 16-12.
The second half was something of a procession as Souths laid on three tries and continued their assault on the Knights through the middle of the ruck. Tries to Dane Gagai, Damien Cook and Greg Inglis cemented the win, and the cardinal and myrtle are looking more and more like the real deal in 2018.
Personally, the match will always be remembered for the second try to Souths as Cody Walker crossed the line with a shimmy of the hips and an explosive lunge at the line. Losing his mother during the week must surely have placed enormous pressure on his game, and he was determined to send her to a better place with a try.
He did just that and I was upset that my wife started peeling onions nearby when he crashed over and made an obvious gesture as a tribute to his late mum.
(AAP Image/Darren Pateman)
The late game saw the Cowboys finally secure the win they have been so desperately seeking to drag themselves off the bottom of the table. Either the Bulldogs or Eels look likely to assume that position come the end of the weekend.
Carrington Park Bathurst played host to their clash with Penrith. The Cowboys well and truly jumped the Panthers, with Johnathan Thurston finally finding some form. He was still nowhere near his best yet, with Matt Scott, Gavin Cooper and Michael Morgan all playing key roles in the first half – the legend was allowed to slowly work his way into the game.
By the second period some of the confidence had returned and the Cowboys were able to repel an enthusiastic Panthers comeback that looked to have legs until Thurston himself crossed in the 54th minute.
The 26-20 result will rejuvenate the hopes of the Cowboys and send the inconsistent Panthers back to the drawing board prior to their clash with the Knights next Friday.
Fraser
Guest
Yes I would be happy with that being called a knock back. Dropping the ball backwards has nothing to do with body position. NRL is not touch footy.
Philip Heron
Guest
Gee I hate it when facts are bought into a good story. Well what can we complain about now? I know, lets start on manly or brookvale oval ;)
The Barry
Roar Guru
Surprise surprise...Bronco fan Fraser thinks the "technically correct" decision that went the Broncos way was a great call...but the "technically correct" decision that went against the Broncos was a howler. So seriously Fraser...with my example of a player at first receiver dropping the ball in front of him but it deflecting backwards off his hands, you'd be happy with that being called a knock back?
Fraser
Guest
*landed behind him, relative to where he first touches the ball.
Fraser
Guest
Yes, a ball that travels backwards is a knock back. There's no technicality involved. The ball landed behind him. It's indisputable. Regarding the Slater dropped kick, I absolutely agree that's an awful decision. He is entitled to drop kick the ball, per the referees interpretation. But he's not entitled to drop it and then kick it. Also, the ball bounced twice before he got his boot to it. I would also be happy to discuss the momentum argument you've raised earlier, as I actually am a Physicist. Thankfully the referees don't need to be in order to adjudicate our game. P.S. it occurs on the 10 metre line, not the 20. But I'm sure you've watched it more than once ?
Two shades
Guest
Well? That answers my question...your continuously drunk!
Emcie
Roar Guru
You don't rate de Belin? I'd suggest Jackson but he's probably a bit slow for a fullback
Nat
Roar Guru
I don't think anyone is saying it shoudln't have been called a knock on. There is a difference a between a good call, the right call and searching for an interpretation to justify the call, as was the case with Billy. The ref was on the spot, obviously saw all momentum going backwards and made the call accordingly so would you not agree that it was a 50/50 at best? My point to Steveng was to contradict the use of "blatant" and "crucial part of the game". You appear to agree with that. Or further the pretense of favouritism he has put forward repeatedly. I think we've both argued against those who cite one decision then speculate on the rest of the game.
Two shades
Guest
Mate...are you continuously drunk? I don’t know if your having a laugh or not.
steveng
Roar Rookie
Yeah '3_Hats SSTID 2014' we've been saing that since our prediction at the start of the seasons!!! Rear our lips 'Souths A Top 4 Side'!!! Go the Bunnies!!! We've got Sammy back this coming week and the Dragons better watch out!!!!
The Barry
Roar Guru
I know the rules. I know that by the letter of the law the ball hit Isaako at the 22 metre line and landed on the 20 metre line and the refs are within their rights to call it a knock back. But that doesn’t make it the correct decision. As neutral fans have pointed out incidents like Isaako’s are almost always called as knock ons. Isaako called it a knock on. So, a player is standing at first receiver with his hands out in front of him. He gets a pass from the dummy half that hits his hands and deflects to the ground at an obtuse angle to land in front of his feet. The ball travels backwards from where it hits his hands to where it lands. By the strictest definition of the law that you’re applying in the Isaako situation the ball hasn’t been propelled towards the opponents goal line so should be called a knock back. Are you seriously telling me that you’d be happy with the refs calling a knock back in this situation? Of course not. But it would be technically correct. There needs to be some common sense applied that a player who drops the ball in that situation has knocked the ball on because it’s touched his hands and landed in front of him. The fact that it actually travelled backwards after touching his hands is irrelevant other than in the strictest most literal interpretation of the laws. The Isaako knock on is exactly the same. I get the ball travelled backwards after he touched it but relative to Isaako the ball was always in front of him. Calling it a knock back might be technically correct, but it’s still a bogus decision based on a lack of football common sense. And it’s the same thing with the Slater try. The refs can come back and say “he’s allowed to drop kick the ball” but anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that wasn’t his intention and that Slater knocked the ball on. I bet you weren’t congratulating the refs last week for their literal interpretations of the rule book. Come one, Frase tell the truth. ? I’m pro Bulldogs and have never resiled from that. But calling me anti-bronco is puerile. Look at all the neutral fans that are calling it a dud decision. I estimate it’s coming down at 80/20. Your blind defence of a dud decision because it’s “technically” correct and favoured the Broncos is making you look silly. For what it’s worth, I really think this was just one small decision in a game and I’m not pinning the Dogs loss to this decision or the Mbye decision or the Morris decision at all. Some people are, but I’m not. These things happen. Swings and roundabouts. I get all that. But that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be discussed.
Mike Gordon
Roar Rookie
The ref thought he kicked it, it’s not his fault Slater is a magician. If The Slater went for it, without the trickery, he scores. Either way it’s a try and he’s brilliant, even if in this case he didn’t know it.
Fraser
Guest
Mate learn the rules then come back. Knock-on is completely different to a forward pass. Your anti-Broncos / pro-Bulldogs bias is making you look silly.
The Barry
Roar Guru
The Slater incident was BS...I’m still saying it. Because the refs pulled an interpretation out that I’ve never seen before to justify a gronk call. The Isaako incident is the same.
Emcie
Roar Guru
Well if that's what you meant we're talking about different things than. I assumed you meant that they'd be certain contenders in the finals as opposed to contenders to make the finals. I was never having a go at the Panthers, just saying that it's hard to judge their season off the draw they've had so far.
Mike Gordon
Roar Rookie
I agree with you 40 20, to a degree. In the dogs/ broncos game there was more than one turning point-there were lots. Same with most of the games in this years crazy comp. Inconsistent even. That’s why I love it!
Emcie
Roar Guru
Mate, I don't know what you're getting upset about, nowhere in the rule book does it state that a knock-on is at all dependent on where the player ends up. The rule book specifically states "Knock-on - means to knock the ball forward towards the opponents’ dead ball line", that's pretty clear cut and makes no reference to to balls position relative to the player. The forward pass rule is no parallel, that rule specifically uses the player as a reference - the knock-on rule specifically uses the field (dead ball line) as reference, you can't just add interpretations to the rule book when it suits you. At any rate, it wasn't even the first knock back that's been called this season anyway so I'm not sure why its being treated as any more then a 50/50. And given that the ref was as close as he was and immediately ruled that it was a knock back (when the go to reaction is knock-on) and that the ball went back close to 2 meters from first contact do you not think that the ref perhaps had reason to rule the way he did?
souvalis
Guest
Wasn’t basing that ‘finals contenders’ on opposition they’ve faced so much as to the number of wins they’ve racked up despite the stink in the front office and with the skeleton staff they’ve had on duty..best/most significant player in the team has only played 2 1/2 games..backrowers playing centre and 5/8,yet still beating ‘hopeless’ opposition..a pretty wishy washy meaningless cop out expression considering the constant form variance of most sides from week to week..your ‘logic’ must tell you that West Tigers are a finals chance because they’ve beaten the premiers twice and, ‘every man and their dogs’ tip to win it ..the Roosters.. Sure,the Panthers will have to dig deep for the next month with 8 regulars unavailable..but gee you’d need to have a stronger reason than a surly ‘hopeless opposition’ to mount a serious argument against them being at bare minimum in that Top 8 once normal ‘programming’ is resumed..
Dan Vella
Guest
finally! First time I’ve heard someone suggest Walker for Blues .. could do worse!
Mike Gordon
Roar Rookie
That was last year this is now. This year they’re calling knockbacks for what they are-hallalooya, isn’t that what we all wanted? I guess not.