The Roar
The Roar

Paul

Roar Guru

Joined October 2017

77.7k

Views

94

Published

9.9k

Comments

Published

Comments

Roar Guru
Roar Guru

Stuart Broad is right!

I never thought I’d be saying this about Stuart Broad. On the field, he epitomises the term “lion-hearted”, but I didn’t give him a lot of credit for his thinking on the game as a whole.

I thought Annersely’s recent performances were showing off some entrenched private enterprise skills.

Accept no responsibility, throw someone else under the bus for the managers failings, promise to fix the issue for the umpteenth time then sit back and watch the carnage continue. That was the approach taken by our banks in recent years, so maybe Annersley’s picked up on their approach.

I hate the Bunker

I understand your reasoning Nathan, but as others have pointed out, when it comes to finals footy, luck and a host of other intangibles comes into play.

IF the Panthers are going to win though, they have to get off to fast starts against the Roosters, Storm and even the Eels/Raiders. You can bet all of these sides will lift in intensity and the Panthers need to be able to match that. In recent weeks their starts have been scratchy, which makes it tough to win finals games.

This was a nice first piece.

Four reasons Penrith will fall short of NRL glory in 2020

hi Nathan, the Roar is all about offering opinions and you’ve done a pretty fair job arguing your points. Duncan’s comment is quite right. If someone can’t be bothered to refute your ideas with some well reasoned thoughts, I’d be ignoring them.

Four reasons Penrith will fall short of NRL glory in 2020

I agree this is close to the best Qld 17, but I’d be concerned about choosing guys who are not in great form. I’m not sure about Val Holmes, Feldt or Morgan, all of who have had less than stellar seasons. Fair enough, in Morgan & Holmes cases, this was mostly down to extended periods of injury, but it doesn’t bode well if these guys are picked because there are not too many other options.

That forward pack should be easily able to match it with the Blues though. I guess the big question wil be who’s actually going to be available to play at the end of the season?

Who Queensland should pick for Origin this year

hi Andrew, the issue isn’t with the Bunker per se, its that Annersley thinks he has to placate the media by throwing his refs under the bus, almost on a weekly basis.He’s doing nothing to improve the system, but has no problems fronting the media to explain why HE was sure the Bunker had got 50:50 calls wrong. That’s just gutless management IMO.
If some areas of the Bunker were tweaked, eg how long it takes to make a call, I think it would be fine.

I hate the Bunker

You were doing really well in explaining why you hate the bunker till your last paragraph Barry. It seems from that you like the Bunker for specific things but not for others.

Unlike the majority who will post on this topic, I very much like the Bunker…. but not in it’s present iteration. How quickly we forget why it was introduced – there was a huge outcry from the media in particular about onfield decision that were made and later proven to be incorrect. Naturally the public picked up on this and Greenberg created the monster we currently use.

I’m very much in favour of both a captains challenge and a review system where the onfield ref uses a screen based on the side line to check decisions. They can use one of their touch judges (who are qualified refs) for assistance if need be, but they alone should complete the review process.

If you listen to the onfield ref when they ask for a review their first few words include “please check”. Surely they’re capable of doing that themselves?

If we have no bunker, I’m guessing 30 or 40% of the spectacular tries we see wingers score in the corner now, will be ruled no try and of course, we’ll have tries scored where players clearly drop the ball. In other words, we go back to what we had 5 years ago when people were whinging. Remember too, the broadcasters & media would love to have no Bunker because that would significantly increase the incorrect decisions, giving them plenty more topics to rage on about, as is Gould and co needed that!

Not using technology makes no sense when it’s there and when used well, works well. Expecting perfection thanks to technology is wrong, as is the current methods. Fix the methods and it will enhance not detract from the game.

I hate the Bunker

” I think the NRL forgets that perfect is the enemy of good. ”

Excellent comment, Adam

NRL flags bunker changes after wrong call

he could have killed someone if playing on Gabba grass.

Baggy Green prodigies: If you’re good enough, then you’re old enough

I didn’t look at Glasby’s numbers when I made the comment Nat,so thanks for throwing in some thoughts on those. I was going with the gut, based on his impact in games for the Storm versus his impact for the Knights. As you suggest, he’s not standing out as much, hence my belief he’s gone backwards as a player, but I might have to rethink thatview if his defensive numbers are well up.

Nobody does it better than the Storm

I’m on the “not keen” side when the Storm gets mentioned. That said, they can turn on some brilliant football and there’s no doubt they’ve got it right when it comes to recruitment & retention.

The player that sticks in my mind when I think about how they keep or trade players is Tim Glasby. He really looked the goods when he played for the Storm and certainly deserved his SOO games. Then he got traded to the Knights and many including me wondered why Bellamy decided to let him go. What’s he done since?

A really good article Barry, you’ve certainly got the hang of this writing caper. 😊

Nobody does it better than the Storm

maybe Jimmy should have kept reading! I got what you meant. 😊

Nobody does it better than the Storm

so they’re going to host the start of the Shield next month, then play the first SOO in the first week of November? I reckon Hough will be pulling his hair out after being told about that.

Spare a thought for the Adelaide Oval curator

I wonder if Damien Hough agrees with you? The workload on he and his staff will be enormous and that’s assuming everything plays in his favour

Spare a thought for the Adelaide Oval curator

My first reaction when I read these woeful comments from Annerseley was ” get into the bunker genius and show us how it should be done”.

The guys who are paid to make a decision in the bunker disagreed over the correct decision regarding an obstruction, so made a decision they were perfectly entitled to make. So what does Annersley do? Throws them under the bus days after the incident when he’s had time and countless viewings of this incident.

He even goes a step further and derides the decision they were entitled to make “I think it should have been a try today, tomorrow, Saturday and every day of the week. But it was an error by the bunker caused by a disagreement, or differing views.”

This guy is seriously failing to do his job and needs to go. Placating the media while treating his staff with contempt is hardly what a person is his position should be doing. I blame him for how the bunker is or is not going. He’s had more than a few seasons to sort this out and all he’s done is learned how to make his refs look stupid.

NRL flags bunker changes after wrong call

so if there’s foul play in the immediate leadup that would result in a penalty to the defending team, but the onfield ref doesn’t ask for that to be checked, you’re okay with that?

NRL flags bunker changes after wrong call

The “weaker” bats have shown they can handle the conditions though Cari. I think there are any number of guys who could open or bat 3 in both short ball formats, other than Finch & Smith.Guys like Stoinis, Phillipe, etc, are happiest at the top of the order, when the ball is still hard and the fields are up. They struggle to really get going once the ball gets soft and they can’t hit where they like because of the extra fielders in the deep.

I agree it’s not ideal, but given our lack of a world class finisher, I don’t see why it shouldn’t be tried.

Australia collapse, England win second ODI

First of all, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your piece, Tom. You have a writing style that’s both funny and educational, which makes it a pleasurable read.

In term of the streaming debate, surely it’s just another one of the pantheon of media options we have available now? Years ago, when there was only one or two matches broadcast on TV per week, many of us had our ears tuned into the wireless, listening to the dulcet tones of Frank Hyde saying “it’s high enough, it’s long enough….”. Fast forward a few decades and we can watch league through all manner of media, BUT we still have audio only broadcast and these still have a very faithful following. Ditto for actual newspapers.

In saying that, I’d have been in huge trouble trying to watch the finals last year in SE Asia because the local TV had wall to wall soccer. Thankfully there were a few smart bar owners who invested the AUD $199 ( not sure why you’re paying 25 quid a month?), so I got to watch the games. More importantly, I watched with a bunch of mates in full pubs, which is the next best thing to being at a game, IMO.

Streaming is here to stay. It will find its niche in the broadcast market, but I doubt greatly it will dominate, certainly not in my lifetime.

Online streaming is part of the future, but it cannot dominate

You’ve put together some terrific articles this year Matt and this is one of the best of them, IMO. I wouldn’t know where to start looking for the needed to decide who was top of the pile, across on hundred odd years of Test cricket.

It’s easy to understand why some players/teams might have become arrogant when they were winning so regularly. That’s the sort of thing that both the great Windies sides of the 80’s & 90’s and the Aussies who feature so much in your tables have in common.

As an aside, I wonder how Gilchrist numbers stack up against other Aussie sports? I was looking at Cam Smith, for example and I think he wins about 2.69 games before a loss. A wonderful record for rugby league but not even close to Gilly’s numbers.

Australia’s 'winningest' Test cricketers

that’s got to be one of the best comments you’ve produced Sheek. 👍 👍 👍

How Cricket Australia killed my interest in the professional game

I seem to recall the ACB had to change the rules about involvement in the Under 19’s back in the 80’s thanks to Craig McDermott. He debuted in Tests but was still eligible to play in that tournament for Qld. Wiser heads suggested Billy should sit that one out!

Baggy Green prodigies: If you’re good enough, then you’re old enough

You make some excellent points in your article Paul and you’re absolutely not alone in believing Cricket Australia’s “quantity over quality” formula has hurt the game at the top levels.

I’m amazed how often those in charge fail to learn from history. The (then) ACB did exactly the same thing in the 1980’s as CA is doing now. They thought Australians couldn’t get enough of the West Indies, so they scheduled a multitude of series, but their biggest cash cow was the ODIs. You wouldn’t remember the triple header weekends, when three teams would play 3 games and there’d be upwards of 20 – 30 games in a frantic period after Christmas. Sound familiar?

As was the case then and is now, it was terrific for a while but people burnt out from too much cricket – but the various Australian Boards were either too stupid, or too greedy to see what was patently obvious to the rest of us – the quantity of cricket was killing our enthusiasm for the game.

I reject the notion people nowadays are time poor. What people want and will pay for, is to watch quality, not quantity, unless the quality of the entertainment is super exceptional. People will watch the World Cup for example, even though there are more than 40 games in 6 weeks, IF the quality of the cricket is high, which it was last year, for example. Ask people to watch games that are okay quality or games that are played with only average players and people will switch off (which is a large part of the beef Channel 7 has with CA about the BBL).

There is too much cricket, which is a known problem worldwide and the ICCs answer – reduce the number of days of Test cricket, so players can have a decent rest! This shows it’s not just CA with it’s head in the sand, but the rest of the games administrators as well.

The one shining light from all of this is your continued involvement in the game. It’s great you’re still getting pleasure from umpiring good honest cricket games. I doesn’t matter what’s the standard, as long as everyone enjoys being involved.

How Cricket Australia killed my interest in the professional game

Gee there are some terrific names on both these lists. It’s interesting just how brave Australian selectors have been over the decades, but as you rightly point out, the current system doesn’t suit youngsters getting much game time against the men, which is where so many young cricketers gained their spurs.

Greg Chappell’s comment was instructive. He was very much in favour of blooding young players, probably too much IMO. I think more than a few guys were picked too young under his watch because very few exceptional players can make a go of top class cricket at such a young age.

It’s funny, I was looking for Pup’s name on these list and was surprised not to see it. The old fella didn’t start his Test career till he was 23!

Interesting too, there are no spinners.

Baggy Green prodigies: If you’re good enough, then you’re old enough

I’m not sure they can with the quarantine restrictions, Micko. At least not initially anyway

Spare a thought for the Adelaide Oval curator

No argument about that. This article though is about Morris stating his side fears no side in the finals and that’s fair enough. My comment is how many of the real contenders fear the Sharks? Not many me thinks,but as you suggest, being the underdogs is a tag they wear well.

Cronullla fear no-one: Morris

I wonder whether they can get 20 good overs from the three guys you named, on a regular basis? We don’t have a team of thrashers like England does and we also don’t bat down to 10 or 11, so we have to be far more conservative in the runs we give away.

The other problem with those three guys is their lack of wicket taking. If they were to go for 120 off their 20 shared overs, but take 3 or 4 wickets in 75% of games, that would be a fair trade off, but giving up a run a ball off 20 overs and take none or one wicket isn’t.

Australia collapse, England win second ODI