The Roar
The Roar


Roar Pro

Joined July 2017







In the time of chimpanzees, I was a monkey.



Where's my moral outrage?

It’s dark out here beyond the circle. There air is sweet with smoke and sweat. Angry eyes all wet and vacant. Teeth glint off burning lanterns. Hey, what’s going on in there? I clench my pitchfork all the same. Tonight, they seethe, there’s witches afoot.

Ha. Cheers mate. Did they not teach satire in your school of the hard knocks?

I’m sorry Reds. But it’s not me, it’s you

Cheers. We can only hope they’ll be a bit more competitive. But the squad looks weaker if anything

I’m sorry Reds. But it’s not me, it’s you

I think that’s the most sensible outcome. Maybe a provision like “…unless the attempt did not make contact with the head, and effecting a conventional tackle would not have reasonably been expected to prevent a try in a try scoring position.”

This would bring it in broad agreement with the tackled in the air rule.

Billy lives: Thank god that’s over

I genuinely don’t see an issue. He was charged based on an unforeseen technicality and was able to use another one to make it right.

Grand final bound! Billy Slater free to play NRL decider

I hope you never see me waiting in a loading zone and attempt a citizens arrest mate

If Billy Slater plays on Sunday, I won't be watching

I don’t think anyone’s actually arguing he should play simply because he deserves a fairytale. To suggest this is slow witted at best, and disingenuous at worst.

Most objections regard either (a) it wasn’t strictly a letter-of-the-law shoulder charge, or (b) the citing is an unintended consequence of introducing the rule.

To fit your speeding analogy – Slater was clocked on a private road.

Why Billy Slater isn't entitled to his fairytale ending

‘The rule was never intended for this’ is the argument

Context, monkeys and bananas: Why Slater should be cleared

You’re the first person I’ve ever heard to defend mobile speed cameras.

Context, monkeys and bananas: Why Slater should be cleared

That whooshing noise is my point flying over your head.

Ask (a) was it a play that we intended to eradicate, then, if not (b) since rules and interpretations can be change at any time, why not now?

Context, monkeys and bananas: Why Slater should be cleared

Similarly, the wet lettuce Mitchell copped was farcical. The chooks have dodged a few bullets already. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander – let them all play.

Context, monkeys and bananas: Why Slater should be cleared

Categorically disagree. If we applied rules in a vacuum there would be no need for a tribunal.

That’s the unreasonable cop approach.

Context, monkeys and bananas: Why Slater should be cleared

But surely that wacky interpretation will be amended in the offseason. Why not now?

Context, monkeys and bananas: Why Slater should be cleared

Could not disagree more JN. I can’t see any difference between the Chambers tackle and the Mitchell one. Both were dangerous. Both were coached maneuvers. Whether Dugan was legitimately hurt or not is inconsequential. If Mitchell plays again this year that will amount to a gross inconsistency. Punitive measures should be applied regardless of whether its Round 1 or a GF.

Six talking points from Sydney Roosters vs Cronulla Sharks NRL qualifying final

Thanks for the input. I’d say a one tackle optional advantage (union deliberately knock on or kick it away), and if the defending side cynically infringes – they lose one to the bin and the mark is advanced.

I just get frustrated seeing a break out play that gets nullified by a cynical infringement.

The precious lesson league can learn from union


Two point tries is an interesting thought. I remember in junior league a dummy half try was worth less. Similar situation I guess – trying to encourage more thoughtful play.

I like that they’re dropping the interchanges in a couple of years too.

The precious lesson league can learn from union

By any metric you *care to define*…

The precious lesson league can learn from union

I think a lot of reds fans are in a similar position Andrew. I also went to the game, and was relatively entertained. They are definitely moving in the right direction, albeit slowly. However, forgetting my members card I had to pay for a casual entry – despite proving I was legitimate. This, combined with the ridiculous price of drinks (which is far outstripping inflation) has made me reassess my continuing support. More looking forward to seeing the Brisbane City Councilllors at Ballymore than the Reds at Suncorop in future.

Hard truths: I’m still in rugby limbo

“Anthony Minichiello versus Darren Lockyer in the 2000s”. Was that ever a point of contention?

Queensland save face, but it will be the ‘Kanga-Blues’

Maloney continues to travel forward – his legs don’t just fall off. The ball stops accelerating towards the goal line when it leaves his hands – it loses forward momentum faster than he does. That’s why he ends up in front of the ball.

Can someone provide a charge code for this?

Inglis’ gritty Queenslanders go down as they don’t get the crucial calls

Honestly mate. Pull your head in. You are way off the mark.

Who Super Rugby fans should support at the FIFA World Cup

I think Reds fans will most likely identify with the Socceroos – a plucky team of relative no-names just having a red-hot go. Everyone loves an underdog. I’d guess they’re both seen as a bit of nuisance value by the big teams.

Who Super Rugby fans should support at the FIFA World Cup

Thanks for the feedback. But I can assure you that you’re boxing at shaddows there.

Who Super Rugby fans should support at the FIFA World Cup

Serious question from a non-soccer fan trying to cram for the WC. Why is Australia ranked so highly – given that there are many higher quality teams ranked below us? E.g., we’re 40th at present, and ahead of a suite of Africans and Europeans we’d start as heavy outsiders against.

I’ve always assumed we were the ones done a favour just by being given a path to qualify. And whatever happens once we got there was a bonus.

The Socceroos draw the World Cup ‘group of death’ again

Based on the publically available evidence – their decision to not appeal is nonsensical. The most likely scenario is that CA has some unstated leverage.

Cynic's view of why Steve Smith accepted his sanctions

Totally agree biltongbek. Glad I’m not completely alone on this one. Seems to just be myself and everyone else in the world who isn’t a casual Australian cricket fan or part of the media.

I posted about the vendetta angle without any traction. Brett Geeves insinuated as much over on fox sports – but he’s got journalistic integrity to maintain. I’d be very surprised if there isn’t an appeal. Interested to know if the ACA and CA had allowed for referral to the court of arbitration for sport.

Rousing debate rages on Aussie ball tampering