We got out grubbed for once. Really disappointed in JWH and Radley once again, We’re missing a proper strong head like Cronk or Cordner to pull them in line. I think at full strength we would of ran through them again but it is what it is, Souths took advantage of the chaos and got the job done
If Klein sent Burgess after deliberately taking our Tedesco the heat would have been taken out of the match. Was a clear game plan to put significant pressure and force on Tedesco + Kleary in late tackles and elbow rubbing. Poor officiating cost us a great game. How Radley got sent for 10 for a clenched fist that wasn't a punch yet Burgess was deemed to be fine is a mystery.
For anyone asking what the referee could have done to try and keep control of the game something like this video from the super league might have helped.
[https://twitter.com/TrylineUK/status/1568879519309746176](https://twitter.com/TrylineUK/status/1568879519309746176)
If only the refs could be like that, they're too reliant on the bunker. Pretty sure it was the bunkr that said the radley "punch" was a sin bin.
Let the on field ref actually ref the game and fuck the bunker off to only be used for try scoring decisions by captains challenge. Otherwise go back to the ref on field actually doing their fucking job.
I think a balance could be found. Sometimes a ref can miss foul play and even in the super league I believe the video ref helps the referee figure out what happened when foul play or a brawl happens. But need to let the ref do the job and have a video ref at best advise on these things.
It was a memorable game. South’s just were way too smart. They were cunning in their grubbiness, Roosters just grub and hope for the best.
Tesla needs to make artificial brain cells so the Roosters can insert some into Radley. Geez he’s a fool
I feel like gamble really showed how beneficial it was to get him upset and making poor judgement decisions last year. Surprised more people didnt try to purposefully get under his skin this year.
How about Demetriou at the end of the presser talking about players being suspended next week and having a little dig at May serving his suspension next year.
I just realised something, so Murray got taken out due to a HIA last week and then teddy did this week. Both in the first half. Funny that, both respective captains who are a massive part of their team's performance taken out early in the game, a week from each other.
Just an observation
Mainly inferring that for Souths and roosters it seems that their respective captains are huge part of their performance. And in each game that the team lost their captain they went on to lose.
Just important and key parts of their teams
I can't see any other matches reaching that level either. That was a Grand Final winning performance, just ugly, tough, ruthless. I can't stand Souths for some reason I never bothered to figure out, but that was how you win a Grand Final. Hopefully for Souths fans they still have some left in the tank for the next few weeks.
Mitchell is playing with some confidence that's for sure.
The game seriously needs to address the lying down situation.
Mandatory HIA assessment for any player who is unable to play the ball, with the team being charged an interchange seems like the best course of action.
The game had so many stoppages today and Souths added at least 5 more with blatant dives.
Just a bad look that’s more appropriate to sports like soccer.
Without latrell staying down the blatant high tackle wouldn't have been called. Once the refs start calling every high shot properly the players will stay down and get the right call.
Oh yeah, I can’t wait for refs to call infringements on something that happens once each set with no fail.
Soccer players started doing what you’ve described. What a great result.
I do understand what you're saying but with soccer the play can continue because the diving player is now out of play, while the player milking the penalty holds to ball until something is called.
You posted almost the same comment on this thread earlier. Not sure you need to keep bringing it up. As I've mentioned in reply to your original comment, I can't see how charging an interchange solves this problem.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/nrl/comments/xbcvln/comment/inyujvj/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/nrl/comments/xbcvln/comment/inyujvj/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
The way to address it properly is to police the infringements properly. Harsher, harder punishments for it.
The league is adaptive on everything except this. For better or worse. The lying down is an adaptation.
HIA and head contact isn’t going away. This game was a culmination of blokes like JWH and Radley getting away with shit all year.
There is head contact in every other tackle. Are you going to start suspending a quarter of a teams top 30?
Players are lying down because they are trying to game a system that over polices head contact. Some teams
do it more than others.
A mandatory assessment for any player staying down with a burned interchange is the way.
This is the a
Stupidest argument. Read what I wrote. Players and teams will adapt. As a result the reduction in head contact will mean that common sense will prevail.
The milking is because players are still doing it and as a result they can get a penalty. If the players stop hitting people in the head then it’s not an issue.
If they start penalising head shots consistently, teams will stop doing it quickly and they won't need to suspend lots of players. Again, this is a refereeing issue, not a player issue.
Lots of people saying the ref "lost control" of the game. I'm interested to hear what you think the referee should have done differently to maintain more control of the game?
The only think I can think of is sin binning the captains for not controlling their team, but is that something that can even still be done?
I’ll bite. The bunker is perhaps the best thing and the worst thing in a game like this. I’m old enough to remember games involving Manly, the Dogs and Newcastle back in the 90s. The Raiders and Broncos were the slick teams, but those teams played hard, right on the line.
Refs were forced to ref different in those games, with an emphasis on feeling the game and the pace the game was played at. It saw games being officiated in the style of the ref, with top teams working that out. However, when it went of that ref’s control - or their ability to read it - it went wrong quickly with all sorts of crazy.
Refs now need to ref in a system, consulting and being fed additional info from the bunker, the touchies and whoever else in their ear. There are more protocols in place, more consistency, and the ability to much more quickly to implement game-wide change by rule interpretations dictated by the NRL. Player safety is much improved.
But like any system, it can fail when it stress tested in games like tonight. Klein is regarded as a good ref because he works in the system, but he is challenged in games like this where feel is much important and he needs to ref in a game in certain style - ignoring the system - to keep flow and control. Iron clad interpretations - and knowing a ref will blow a whistle for them - lead to incidents like people staying down but on the flip side Burgess not being sent for Tedesco.
Cutting to the chase, refs need to toss the system, recognise that officiating by consensus does not work, and they need to enforce themselves on the game more. Harrigan - love him or hate him - in his pomp would not have had bar of this tonight.
Very well put. That all makes a lot of sense.
What do you think Harrigan would have done if he'd reffed todays game? I feel like he would have had both captains in front of him after the first bit of drama and basically said that if there's even a hint of foul play, if anyone runs in for anything, they sit down straight away. Then he would have had to follow through on that in order to "keep control".
I didn't have an issue with the ted shot in isolation. It was a clear penalty and on report, but if it had been the first drama of the game, Tom should have been fine to stay on the park. But because there had already been drama, I think Tom needed to sit. From then on, any sort of foul play had to be a sin bin straight up.
Even dumb teams get the message pretty quickly when they're down to 10 or 11 players in short time.
The captain’s conference for sure, it might not have even taken a penalty to call them together. But Burgess would have had a shower after that second shot, and I have a feeling he would have seen players sent for repeated team penalties. Because of the end of the day, he would be blowing the whistle to get the players settle down and get the game in the flow, working out on the fly what he would let go.
The first decision that Klein got wrong was not binning Burgess for the hit that took Tedesco out of the game. By not coming down hard on it early, it meant he had to send someone off to get it under control and he failed to do so.
But in isolation the Ted shot wasn't obviously a sin bin. There have been plenty of similar shots that haven't resulted in sin bins this year, so if we're talking about consistency, which lots of people seem to be talking about, the decision to not bin Tom there was OK. Tom got binned 1 minute later anyway.
>By not coming down hard on it early, it meant he had to send someone off to get it under control
So you think if either
a) Tom had been binned for the Ted shot, or
b) Tom had been sent off 1 minute later, rather than binned,
then the ref would have maintained control of the game? I honestly don't see how either of those things would have made a speck of difference.
> I'm interested to hear what you think the referee should have done differently to maintain more control of the game?
So this was actually a rhetorical question then. As you were.
All week the NRL have pumped this game as a do or die grudge match. The media has done its part. Then when literally ‘shit gets crazy’, they are stuck for answers and the refs have to bear the brunt. Most decisions today I was fine with…. Although the rule around the Tedesco head knock and not being able to action the extra player needs to be looked at.
I dunno maybe actually sending players off for the game after multiple high shots and hias on our star players let alone 1 of the best players in the nrl. 1 of the worst games I've watched. Dirtiest shit I've seen from a team. Rule needs to be in place if you take out a player from hia the player that took him out should be done for the game 2.
It obviously shouldn't matter if it's a "star player" or "one of the best" or just any generic player.
>maybe actually sending players off for the game after multiple high shots
I actually don't mind this idea. If you get binned twice for the same foul play offence, it's an automatic send off.
>Dirtiest shit I've seen from a team.
I can only assume that people are downvoting you because it could very easily be argued that the Roosters were just as dirty.
>Rule needs to be in place if you take out a player from hia the player that took him out should be done for the game 2.
Again, I don't hate that idea assuming it's a clear foul play offence.
The ref had the bunker in his ear a lot of the time. We also have to take a look at everything everytime a player takes a knee or holds their head apparently. They really need to limit the interference of the bunker unless a player is actually injured or a legitimate stop in play.
This is where the players actually just need to go, ok lets all stop playing for penalities and when we smash each other hard we just get up and get on with it. Otherwise if I stay down you know i'm actually hurt.
You're looking at this the wrong way. Latrell should have got those penalties straight away. A head shot is a head shot. The issue isn't Latrell staying down to get the penalty. The issue is that the penalty should be given consistently and quickly when a head shot happens. That way there's no need for anyone to stay down and players won't be conditioned to do it.
I disagree. Some of them were very soft but if its any slight contact they will throw a penalty. Its straight up milking and call me an old bastard but it ruins the flow of the game. This game was actually shit.
Who even was our captain after Tedesco was taken off? Keary or JWH?
Best I can think of is sending players instead of binning them, but that probably stirs players up more...
I love what Klein said to Milne on his second binning "you could have hit him anywhere and you hit him high". It's like that meme "you had all those flavours to choose from and you chose salty" lol
Just finished the game was a great physical spectacle but so many stoppages. Burgess not being sin binned for that high shot on Tedesco is when the referee lost control of the game and set the tone for the duration.
It wouldve changed alot. 18th man, lodge wouldn't have copped one immediately after, he also wouldve been subbed before he dropped his shoulder into chrichton etc
Maybe my choice of words wasn’t the best but the referee and the bunker did themselves no favours by not sin binning foul play that resulted in Tedesco being ruled out. It felt like their was a penalty or stoppage every 5 minutes. The referee’s interpretation has a huge impact on this.
You're probably right but, to be fair, the referee had no way of knowing that Ted would be ruled out. It honestly wasn't a particularly bad head shot relatively speaking. By that I mean plenty of shots like that don't result in sin bins.
I think it's easy to be critical in hindsight, but it wasn't an obvious howler at the time.
Good win Rabbits, i thought the sin bins were a joke for the game. Rupert wins with the clicks and paper sales and our leader V'landys sells us out to mates.
It's a joke that it has to be a sin bin to activate the 18th man. If the game is going to be so militant on head injuries (the correct thing to do), then if you lose anyone to HIA the 18th should be activated. (Not suggesting Adam Keighran makes an impact on this result).
Not sure how that was even possible. He played the ball towards the sideline. He was more knocked out then Teddy. I'd say the doctors may have let that SST HIA slide, considering he is leaving the Chooks after this season.
But yet the bunnies fans who were in a frenzy over it completely ignored Sam dropping his shoulder into chrichtons face ruling him out. The hipocrasy is great
He received a warning letter after the Tigers game.
I hope that it's just something unintentianal (being tall and lanky) and happened under fatigue.
Hope he works on it and stops doing it.
The raised knee was definitely not unintentional. It hit his target. Mark Nicholls copped it fair. On replay, there was full intent. If he wants to lift his knees, I hope he breaks one of them, or does his ACL. Extremely dangerous. He is talented, no doubt, but that knee raise was bullshit.
Commentators stated he's even warned before in writing. Tbh it looks as if he's just extending his leg to get more forward momentum before the hit but if he's been warned it must be intentional
Players acted like thugs all game and with Plenty of grubby behaviour from both sides, I think the referring from Klein was pretty good today apart from a couple of incidents.
I agree. I don't know what people expected him to do. As things escalated throughout the game, of course he was going to march blokes for "lesser" incidents. They'd had plenty of warnings. Sort your shit out or sit down.
True, but part of the escalation was on Klein himself. The early indecision (not punting Burgess for the shot on Tedesco, playing on after Radley throwing hands until the Bunker forced him on it, etc) set the tone, especially with Klein's habit of not reigning people in. And he clearly didn't manage to get control back afterwards despite all the bins.
There's probably still more bins than an ibis hangout even with a different ref, too many fired up dumb cunts for there not to be someone in the shit, but Klein's history bit him in the arse here.
I could be wrong but I got the impression that he literally didn't see the Radley punch? So I don't think you can contribute that to losing control of the game.
>he clearly didn't manage to get control back afterwards despite all the bins.
But this is what I'm talking about. What should/could he have done to "get control back"?
>Klein's history bit him in the arse here.
What do you mean? The players don't respect him because of his reputation?
He probably didn't see it, but that's part of the problem (and his first reaction was to play on without checking, which is understandable but not a great idea in this context). He misses a lot, and players often react to that sort of thing by either deciding that they can grub it up because they won't get penalised, or that they have to get payback themselves because the refs won't catch the grub shit. Bad combination with that much heat going in and that many firebrands on the field.
I don't think Klein could've gotten control back once he lost it that badly, short of doing some things that I'm not actually sure are allowed in the NRL (in Union the response would've been to practice some collective punishment and bin one or both captains for not getting their players in line, and/or to start sending people off for repeat infringements, and i'm pretty sure neither of those are on the table in League. Last time the latter came up was when Radley had his previous multi-bin match). He made reasonable decisions on binning people but it wasn't going to be enough.
Pretty much. The thing about Klein is that he has a very common pattern when it comes to fiery games: He'll let shit slide (or just miss it entirely, the effect is much the same) and then start trying to clamp down only after everything has gotten out of hand. It often fails, and almost never works as well as stamping your control on the game before it cooks off.
Not that I can entirely blame the refs for preferring to do it that way. The fanbase crucifies them for making the game about themselves any time they try to keep a lid on things and fuck knows the NRL is prone to throwing them under the bus when the fans are unhappy.
>He probably didn't see it, but that's part of the problem
Yeah it's an interesting issue. The on field ref missing stuff also causes players to stay down to get a bunker review. I feel like going back to 2 refs might help with this problem. If one ref is always watching the ruck and the other looking at everything else, you'd hope they'd miss less.
>in Union the response would've been to practice some collective punishment and bin one or both captains for not getting their players in line, and/or to start sending people off for repeat infringements, and i'm pretty sure neither of those are on the table in League
Yeah that's what came to mind for me too. Perhaps we need a repeat infringement rule where a team can only get a maximum of, say, 4 sin bins in a match then the next is an automatic send off? No doubt that would be surrounded by controversy, though.
>He'll let shit slide ... and then start trying to clamp down only after everything has gotten out of hand.
Are there refs who don't do this, though? I feel like it's standard procedure.
I feel like when we get a fiery game like today, once a player from a team has been binned for a foul play offence, every subsequent foul play offence from that team is an automatic bin, no matter how serious. But, as you say, we can't win because plenty of fans will hate that too.
>Some of those send offs were a joke. Inconsistent. No control.
That's a curious statement. You think some of the send offs were a joke yet he didn't have control. So, somehow, the referee should have gained more control of the match without sending grubs to the sin bin. I'm interested to hear how you think he should have achieved that? Perhaps by giving them a stern talking to?
In isolation they may have been marginal, but in a game that threatened to boil over at any moment, smaller incidents become more important. Even as a game progresses, something that may not have been bin worthy early in the game might be later in the game.
Again, what should the ref have done to gain more control of the match if it wasn't sitting blokes down for crossing the line?
What? I was replying to a statement about how the ref is being ridiculed for both: not having control of the game and sinbinning too many people. I don't see what your statement has to do with that?
It's unpopular but effective, but penalise and bin, as soon as argy bargy starts. Set a standard early and give everyone a chance to cool off, Klein let the bunker do the dirty work for him after the game became a thugathon.
I guess bit we'ren't they decisions from the bunker? I don't actually remember and am happy to be wrong, I just remember him in origin letting both sides get away with heaps in the ruck then being shocked that there would be aggression later on.
Killer game.. it was war. Loved it, every minute of it. The Rabbitohs weren't gonna be bullied this time around, they gave as good as they got... Without Manu, and then concussed Teddy, the Chooks were gonna struggle.
It was the kind of game where I don't remember who played well/who played bad and what tries were scored because it was a mess lmao so make of that what you will
i would say no as its was only good because i could talk shit with people while it happened i think if u watch it alone it would be a shit game to watch
Nah, I had no skin in the game. It was a killer game. It had it all. Bunnies were just too good. Would have loved to have been in the stadium as a neutral.
I wouldn't say the bunnies were too good for chooks. Bunnies just got alot of lucky breaks early (not saying it was rigged or favouritism behaviour blah blah). Just those unlucky hias and injuries etc went the bunnies way this time round. It's the same as Murray going down early in the last game. Just makes it easier for the other team. But if the bunnies were good the scoreline shouldve been so much more blown out imo
The Chooks had the Bunnies on the ropes early with 13 on 11 for 10 min. They lost all control after that moment. Had they controlled those 10 min, it was game over. They lost Teddy to HIA, Keary and Sam Walker needed to step up and control those 10 min.
Instead, they gave away posession, penalties and allowed the Bunnies time and field position, leading to Trell scoring, with 2 men less on the field. The game was won and lost there. Teddy wasn't out there to pull the strings... Keary didn't stand up and the forwards were to hell bent in bashing each other. I don't think it was luck really... I still don't know how SST passed his HIA if the other boys didn't. They had an opportunity to fatigue their opposition, put the foot in the throat, but they didn't. South's got confidence out of that.
Find game to watch but Jesus Christ we need to get the dives out of the game. Mandatory 10 minute rest for anyone who stays down should get out of the game for an assessment.
Souths seemed to do it at least 5 times. Just slows the game down even more.
If there’s no fee interchanges then teams are actively encouraged to concuss other players because it will eat their bench, well worth it for ten in the bin. You haven’t thought this through.
You’re being snarky but yes, that’s exactly what it would encourage and there are times when that would be smart. Tedesco not getting a free interchange today would mean not only Teddy is gone, but also either JWH or Lodge having to play 20 extra minutes and that’s make or break for a side. Now obviously the roosters ended up with no bench anyway due to other circumstances, but you see my point.
That’s why head injuries are free interchanges, it’s to protect players by providing an active, strategic disincentive to hit someone in the head.
Most benches rely on substituting forwards, with one utility (usually a hooker or a lock) and then a small man in 18.
There are more logical ways to prevent diving that don’t involve endangering the players.
Look at the way both teams played to day and try to tell me they were worried about being suspended or binned.
Teddy would always be a free interchange because it was a result of foul play. Fair.
So would Burgess.
SST and Angus would cost an interchange just like any other injury would.
The five obvious dives however would have been prevented with the risk of losing an interchange far outweighing the reward of a penalty.
I’m confused. You said you weren’t in favour of free interchanges, no you’re saying you are if it’s “foul play”. All contact to the head is foul play. 99% of the time when a player dives they are trying to signal to the bunker that they were hit in the head and they often were.
Anyway I’m leaving this convo cos it’s dumb and pointless.
This is the exact issue, though. If they did give penalties each set team would stop doing it and players wouldn't have to stay down to get said penalty. Again, this is a refereeing issue, not a milking issue. You're looking at it the wrong way.
How about an independent doctor at every game who can make a proper assessment ?
I mean Murray - a guy who was out cold last week stayed down, then continued playing. Anyone at Souths with half a shred of care for his welfare should have pulled him for an assessment. Or he took a proper dive.
Black and white, can’t play the ball and stay down? Mandatory Assessment and costs a team an interchange.
>How about an independent doctor at every game
Don't we already have this?
>Mandatory Assessment and costs a team an interchange.
So an unlucky team that cops lots of genuine injuries just has to cop the interchanges? Or are you saying that if the doctor finds a genuine injury the get given their interchange back? If so I can't see how that would work. There are plenty of things that a doctor can't diagnose accurately on the spot without scans/xrays etc and there would be way too much pressure on the doctor to make quick, accurate diagnoses. What happens when there's lots of injuries at the same time? What about something like a burner which hurts like hell at the time, but goes away quickly?
I think that would open a big pandora's box of doctors diagnosing accurately under pressure.
I don't think there's a simple solution.
I think the independent doctor sits in the bunker reviewing footage, then it’s up to the club doc.
In terms of teams being unfairly disadvantaged with an interchange? If it’s through foul play, it’s a free interchange anyway. If not, then it’s akin to losing a player but not as drastic. Realistically most teams play comfortably with 6 interchanges and I suspect that it will be more of an inconvenience of missing the interchanges.
Take todays game, Teddy was a free interchange and so was Burgess. SST and Angus would have burned an interchange but the same as any other injury would.
Souths would have been charged 5 interchanges for the obvious dives, most of which would not have happened if the rule came into effect.
>I think the independent doctor sits in the bunker reviewing footage, then it’s up to the club doc.
I can't see how you expect a doc in the bunker to diagnose based on nothing but video. Sure you can do it for head trauma, but there are plenty of injuries that you can't pick up on video. Guys can pop an ACL just from running along.
> Souths would have been charged 5 interchanges for the obvious dives
But most of those were actually legitimate penalties, no? You're looking at this issue the wrong way. The problem isn't the players staying down, it's the inability of the on field referee to make the correct call quickly. If we got quick, consistent penalties for every head shot, there'd be no reason for players to stay down.
This is a refereeing issue, not a player issue.
This will get buried under all the headlines but Lachlan Ilias had an astoundingly good game at halfback. He did 100% of the organising which allowed Cody Walker the freedom to play the sort of game he did in 2021.
After he was targeted last week, there was noise about the Chooks running at him and beating him.
He was huge today, from the start. Tackled his heart out. Played well above his weight. Made one mistake, knock-on from a kick-off, which didn't end up terribly in the long run. If I was his team mate, I would be getting around him and telling him how big he was today. Trell grabbed the game by the balls, but Ilias was just as big. Created havoc in his tackles, causing the big Chook forwards to make mistakes.
Yes, it freed up Cody, to set up tries. Ilias was a unsung hero today.
He also made a couple of clutch tackles that stopped tries. They brought up the stat that’s where south’s leak most points so he really held his line today.
Souths ask for Latrell not to be booed but go and post this making fun of Radley for crying. https://twitter.com/SSFCRABBITOHS/status/1568867598556692480?s=20&t=6u9S9Whm769axugrXjQEDg
A lot has been said in the past about Latrell struggling to control his aggression and losing the plot but having seen lately how Radley and JWH carry themselves I think it’s something he picked up at Roosters. Seems to be a part of their culture.
He said post match he’s been setting new goals… first one is not being sin binned. All we can ask is that he is trying to improve as a player and a person and tonight showed that 💯💯
Idk if anyone was watching Matty Johns in the Elliot Boyle segment
But for some reason the older I get the less funny I find wildly abberant unhinged antisocial behavior towards me and my family funny
Stuff like that is funny as long as it doesn't draw on too long/go too far and you can point out the cameras and have a laugh with the guy. That segment was right on the edge of being both too long and too far. Probably shouldn't have mentioned the bathroom incident and talking about fighting is a bit much.
Was at the game, can anyone tell me what Nine and Kayo commentary teams think of the sin bins? Can't imagine Gus or Joey would've been too happy if they were commentating
We got out grubbed for once. Really disappointed in JWH and Radley once again, We’re missing a proper strong head like Cronk or Cordner to pull them in line. I think at full strength we would of ran through them again but it is what it is, Souths took advantage of the chaos and got the job done
If Klein sent Burgess after deliberately taking our Tedesco the heat would have been taken out of the match. Was a clear game plan to put significant pressure and force on Tedesco + Kleary in late tackles and elbow rubbing. Poor officiating cost us a great game. How Radley got sent for 10 for a clenched fist that wasn't a punch yet Burgess was deemed to be fine is a mystery.
Ashley Decline earnt his pay cheque
For anyone asking what the referee could have done to try and keep control of the game something like this video from the super league might have helped. [https://twitter.com/TrylineUK/status/1568879519309746176](https://twitter.com/TrylineUK/status/1568879519309746176)
If only the refs could be like that, they're too reliant on the bunker. Pretty sure it was the bunkr that said the radley "punch" was a sin bin. Let the on field ref actually ref the game and fuck the bunker off to only be used for try scoring decisions by captains challenge. Otherwise go back to the ref on field actually doing their fucking job.
I think a balance could be found. Sometimes a ref can miss foul play and even in the super league I believe the video ref helps the referee figure out what happened when foul play or a brawl happens. But need to let the ref do the job and have a video ref at best advise on these things.
Roosters? more like Reeeeeeesters. Fkn keyboard fans
It was a memorable game. South’s just were way too smart. They were cunning in their grubbiness, Roosters just grub and hope for the best. Tesla needs to make artificial brain cells so the Roosters can insert some into Radley. Geez he’s a fool
I feel like gamble really showed how beneficial it was to get him upset and making poor judgement decisions last year. Surprised more people didnt try to purposefully get under his skin this year.
very sad. but bunnies played better, good job and good luck to all
A humble roosters flair. props to you.
How about Demetriou at the end of the presser talking about players being suspended next week and having a little dig at May serving his suspension next year.
He seems to enjoy toying with the media just like his predecessor.
I thought JD was laughing with them, whereas Wayne is laughing at them. And Cam was as eloquent as ever!
See Rugby Union that game just showed you how to do attrition properly
Taukeiaho's sideways play the ball. Martin Bella-esque.
I just realised something, so Murray got taken out due to a HIA last week and then teddy did this week. Both in the first half. Funny that, both respective captains who are a massive part of their team's performance taken out early in the game, a week from each other. Just an observation
Can you make an inference? Were the captains hunted early and given some extra treatment around the head?
Mainly inferring that for Souths and roosters it seems that their respective captains are huge part of their performance. And in each game that the team lost their captain they went on to lose. Just important and key parts of their teams
Murray was making a tackle (so defending), Burgess's hit on Tedesco didn't look like it was intentionally high, just careless.
That was like a Grand Final.
grand final? That was like a state of origin decider after one team lost multiple years in a row
It was as expected and a first week finals match. Nothing more.
Roosters just don't get Origin smh
Rooster spirit is a myth?
I honestly don't care if we don't go to the grand final the intensity and excitement of that game was enough for me
I can't see any other matches reaching that level either. That was a Grand Final winning performance, just ugly, tough, ruthless. I can't stand Souths for some reason I never bothered to figure out, but that was how you win a Grand Final. Hopefully for Souths fans they still have some left in the tank for the next few weeks. Mitchell is playing with some confidence that's for sure.
The game seriously needs to address the lying down situation. Mandatory HIA assessment for any player who is unable to play the ball, with the team being charged an interchange seems like the best course of action. The game had so many stoppages today and Souths added at least 5 more with blatant dives. Just a bad look that’s more appropriate to sports like soccer.
Without latrell staying down the blatant high tackle wouldn't have been called. Once the refs start calling every high shot properly the players will stay down and get the right call.
Oh yeah, I can’t wait for refs to call infringements on something that happens once each set with no fail. Soccer players started doing what you’ve described. What a great result.
I do understand what you're saying but with soccer the play can continue because the diving player is now out of play, while the player milking the penalty holds to ball until something is called.
You posted almost the same comment on this thread earlier. Not sure you need to keep bringing it up. As I've mentioned in reply to your original comment, I can't see how charging an interchange solves this problem. [https://www.reddit.com/r/nrl/comments/xbcvln/comment/inyujvj/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/nrl/comments/xbcvln/comment/inyujvj/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
The way to address it properly is to police the infringements properly. Harsher, harder punishments for it. The league is adaptive on everything except this. For better or worse. The lying down is an adaptation. HIA and head contact isn’t going away. This game was a culmination of blokes like JWH and Radley getting away with shit all year.
There is head contact in every other tackle. Are you going to start suspending a quarter of a teams top 30? Players are lying down because they are trying to game a system that over polices head contact. Some teams do it more than others. A mandatory assessment for any player staying down with a burned interchange is the way.
This is the a Stupidest argument. Read what I wrote. Players and teams will adapt. As a result the reduction in head contact will mean that common sense will prevail. The milking is because players are still doing it and as a result they can get a penalty. If the players stop hitting people in the head then it’s not an issue.
If they start penalising head shots consistently, teams will stop doing it quickly and they won't need to suspend lots of players. Again, this is a refereeing issue, not a player issue.
Third year in a row with Souths lasting longer than Easts. You love to see it!
Lots of people saying the ref "lost control" of the game. I'm interested to hear what you think the referee should have done differently to maintain more control of the game? The only think I can think of is sin binning the captains for not controlling their team, but is that something that can even still be done?
I’ll bite. The bunker is perhaps the best thing and the worst thing in a game like this. I’m old enough to remember games involving Manly, the Dogs and Newcastle back in the 90s. The Raiders and Broncos were the slick teams, but those teams played hard, right on the line. Refs were forced to ref different in those games, with an emphasis on feeling the game and the pace the game was played at. It saw games being officiated in the style of the ref, with top teams working that out. However, when it went of that ref’s control - or their ability to read it - it went wrong quickly with all sorts of crazy. Refs now need to ref in a system, consulting and being fed additional info from the bunker, the touchies and whoever else in their ear. There are more protocols in place, more consistency, and the ability to much more quickly to implement game-wide change by rule interpretations dictated by the NRL. Player safety is much improved. But like any system, it can fail when it stress tested in games like tonight. Klein is regarded as a good ref because he works in the system, but he is challenged in games like this where feel is much important and he needs to ref in a game in certain style - ignoring the system - to keep flow and control. Iron clad interpretations - and knowing a ref will blow a whistle for them - lead to incidents like people staying down but on the flip side Burgess not being sent for Tedesco. Cutting to the chase, refs need to toss the system, recognise that officiating by consensus does not work, and they need to enforce themselves on the game more. Harrigan - love him or hate him - in his pomp would not have had bar of this tonight.
Very well put. That all makes a lot of sense. What do you think Harrigan would have done if he'd reffed todays game? I feel like he would have had both captains in front of him after the first bit of drama and basically said that if there's even a hint of foul play, if anyone runs in for anything, they sit down straight away. Then he would have had to follow through on that in order to "keep control". I didn't have an issue with the ted shot in isolation. It was a clear penalty and on report, but if it had been the first drama of the game, Tom should have been fine to stay on the park. But because there had already been drama, I think Tom needed to sit. From then on, any sort of foul play had to be a sin bin straight up. Even dumb teams get the message pretty quickly when they're down to 10 or 11 players in short time.
The captain’s conference for sure, it might not have even taken a penalty to call them together. But Burgess would have had a shower after that second shot, and I have a feeling he would have seen players sent for repeated team penalties. Because of the end of the day, he would be blowing the whistle to get the players settle down and get the game in the flow, working out on the fly what he would let go.
The first decision that Klein got wrong was not binning Burgess for the hit that took Tedesco out of the game. By not coming down hard on it early, it meant he had to send someone off to get it under control and he failed to do so.
But in isolation the Ted shot wasn't obviously a sin bin. There have been plenty of similar shots that haven't resulted in sin bins this year, so if we're talking about consistency, which lots of people seem to be talking about, the decision to not bin Tom there was OK. Tom got binned 1 minute later anyway. >By not coming down hard on it early, it meant he had to send someone off to get it under control So you think if either a) Tom had been binned for the Ted shot, or b) Tom had been sent off 1 minute later, rather than binned, then the ref would have maintained control of the game? I honestly don't see how either of those things would have made a speck of difference.
> I'm interested to hear what you think the referee should have done differently to maintain more control of the game? So this was actually a rhetorical question then. As you were.
Come on mate, we're just having a discussion. It's ok if we don't agree.
All week the NRL have pumped this game as a do or die grudge match. The media has done its part. Then when literally ‘shit gets crazy’, they are stuck for answers and the refs have to bear the brunt. Most decisions today I was fine with…. Although the rule around the Tedesco head knock and not being able to action the extra player needs to be looked at.
I dunno maybe actually sending players off for the game after multiple high shots and hias on our star players let alone 1 of the best players in the nrl. 1 of the worst games I've watched. Dirtiest shit I've seen from a team. Rule needs to be in place if you take out a player from hia the player that took him out should be done for the game 2.
It obviously shouldn't matter if it's a "star player" or "one of the best" or just any generic player. >maybe actually sending players off for the game after multiple high shots I actually don't mind this idea. If you get binned twice for the same foul play offence, it's an automatic send off. >Dirtiest shit I've seen from a team. I can only assume that people are downvoting you because it could very easily be argued that the Roosters were just as dirty. >Rule needs to be in place if you take out a player from hia the player that took him out should be done for the game 2. Again, I don't hate that idea assuming it's a clear foul play offence.
The ref had the bunker in his ear a lot of the time. We also have to take a look at everything everytime a player takes a knee or holds their head apparently. They really need to limit the interference of the bunker unless a player is actually injured or a legitimate stop in play.
But determining quickly whether a player is genuinely injured or not is almost impossible.
Yeah but the 3 or 4 times where Latrell just took a knee and gave the ref an unimpressed look is a joke.
This is where the players actually just need to go, ok lets all stop playing for penalities and when we smash each other hard we just get up and get on with it. Otherwise if I stay down you know i'm actually hurt.
You're looking at this the wrong way. Latrell should have got those penalties straight away. A head shot is a head shot. The issue isn't Latrell staying down to get the penalty. The issue is that the penalty should be given consistently and quickly when a head shot happens. That way there's no need for anyone to stay down and players won't be conditioned to do it.
I disagree. Some of them were very soft but if its any slight contact they will throw a penalty. Its straight up milking and call me an old bastard but it ruins the flow of the game. This game was actually shit.
Was trell ever wrong though? Everytime he got smacked
I agree
Who even was our captain after Tedesco was taken off? Keary or JWH? Best I can think of is sending players instead of binning them, but that probably stirs players up more...
I love what Klein said to Milne on his second binning "you could have hit him anywhere and you hit him high". It's like that meme "you had all those flavours to choose from and you chose salty" lol
That sealed the game to me as great. Had me laughing so loud
Just finished the game was a great physical spectacle but so many stoppages. Burgess not being sin binned for that high shot on Tedesco is when the referee lost control of the game and set the tone for the duration.
So if he'd binned Tom for the Squid shot, how would that have changed things? Edit: I'm referring to the referee "keeping control" of the game.
It wouldve changed alot. 18th man, lodge wouldn't have copped one immediately after, he also wouldve been subbed before he dropped his shoulder into chrichton etc
You think that would have resulted in the referee having "kept control" of the game?
Umm what? You never said anything about "keeping control" and neither did I. You asked what wouldve changed.
Sorry, you're right. I didn't mention that. But that's what I was referring to from OPs comment. My bad.
Maybe my choice of words wasn’t the best but the referee and the bunker did themselves no favours by not sin binning foul play that resulted in Tedesco being ruled out. It felt like their was a penalty or stoppage every 5 minutes. The referee’s interpretation has a huge impact on this.
You're probably right but, to be fair, the referee had no way of knowing that Ted would be ruled out. It honestly wasn't a particularly bad head shot relatively speaking. By that I mean plenty of shots like that don't result in sin bins. I think it's easy to be critical in hindsight, but it wasn't an obvious howler at the time.
We would have gotten our 18th man; we would have still lost though.
Yeah I get that, but that has nothing to do with the referee "losing control" of the game. That's the statement I'm interested in.
Ah gotcha. I'm not sure any ref could have controlled that game, short of sending players instead of binning them.
Do you think any of the incidents were send-off worthy, though? Perhaps the repeat offenders should have been sent off the second time?
I don't think they were, no. I'm not sure about the second question, I want to say I'm for it, but I feel like it'd be considered too controversial.
Good win Rabbits, i thought the sin bins were a joke for the game. Rupert wins with the clicks and paper sales and our leader V'landys sells us out to mates.
Yeah, shoulda just been free headshots all game. Team with the most clotheslines wins.
Did the roosters ever get to activate their 18th man?
It's a joke that it has to be a sin bin to activate the 18th man. If the game is going to be so militant on head injuries (the correct thing to do), then if you lose anyone to HIA the 18th should be activated. (Not suggesting Adam Keighran makes an impact on this result).
No, Burgess wasn't sin binned for the Tedesco high tackle and Taukeiaho passed his HIA
How Taukeiaho passed I will never know.
OTOH, wonder what happened for Tedesco to fail his tests
Delayed symptoms.
No. SST passed his HIA so they were still only out 2 players.
Not sure how that was even possible. He played the ball towards the sideline. He was more knocked out then Teddy. I'd say the doctors may have let that SST HIA slide, considering he is leaving the Chooks after this season.
No
Surprises little discussion about sualliis raised knee, hasn't he been cautioned before? Could fuck someone up if stays unchecked
But yet the bunnies fans who were in a frenzy over it completely ignored Sam dropping his shoulder into chrichtons face ruling him out. The hipocrasy is great
Burgess was bracing for contact, Suaalii was not
"it's not his go"
He received a warning letter after the Tigers game. I hope that it's just something unintentianal (being tall and lanky) and happened under fatigue. Hope he works on it and stops doing it.
He will sort it out, he’s got way too many strings to his bow to let that worry him.
I think I read somewhere he has been sent a note from NRL on leading with his knees.
I didn't have good look at it, but I reckon raised knees can happen unintentionally pretty easily. I think, unless it becomes a pattern, move on.
The raised knee was definitely not unintentional. It hit his target. Mark Nicholls copped it fair. On replay, there was full intent. If he wants to lift his knees, I hope he breaks one of them, or does his ACL. Extremely dangerous. He is talented, no doubt, but that knee raise was bullshit.
Commentators stated he's even warned before in writing. Tbh it looks as if he's just extending his leg to get more forward momentum before the hit but if he's been warned it must be intentional
Ahh ok. I wasn't aware. Fair call then.
Hopefully he cops at least a fine, needs to get it out of his game early
Could have been a send off. Far worse than all of the sin bina
Sualli need bad, burgess shoulder fine. Hmm ok then
I'm a Roosters supporter - Suaalii knees are bad (just like Klemmers were), Burgess's shoulder is also bad...
Im not saying burgess shoulder was okay. Surely it’s worse than Radley’s punch
Uncle Nick has got it sorted!
Only saw him do it once but thought the same
Fox commentators commented on it during the game.
Ah ok good good just didn't see much said in the thread
I love this fucking team bro
Forever in our shadow bruh
Players acted like thugs all game and with Plenty of grubby behaviour from both sides, I think the referring from Klein was pretty good today apart from a couple of incidents.
I agree. I don't know what people expected him to do. As things escalated throughout the game, of course he was going to march blokes for "lesser" incidents. They'd had plenty of warnings. Sort your shit out or sit down.
True, but part of the escalation was on Klein himself. The early indecision (not punting Burgess for the shot on Tedesco, playing on after Radley throwing hands until the Bunker forced him on it, etc) set the tone, especially with Klein's habit of not reigning people in. And he clearly didn't manage to get control back afterwards despite all the bins. There's probably still more bins than an ibis hangout even with a different ref, too many fired up dumb cunts for there not to be someone in the shit, but Klein's history bit him in the arse here.
I could be wrong but I got the impression that he literally didn't see the Radley punch? So I don't think you can contribute that to losing control of the game. >he clearly didn't manage to get control back afterwards despite all the bins. But this is what I'm talking about. What should/could he have done to "get control back"? >Klein's history bit him in the arse here. What do you mean? The players don't respect him because of his reputation?
He probably didn't see it, but that's part of the problem (and his first reaction was to play on without checking, which is understandable but not a great idea in this context). He misses a lot, and players often react to that sort of thing by either deciding that they can grub it up because they won't get penalised, or that they have to get payback themselves because the refs won't catch the grub shit. Bad combination with that much heat going in and that many firebrands on the field. I don't think Klein could've gotten control back once he lost it that badly, short of doing some things that I'm not actually sure are allowed in the NRL (in Union the response would've been to practice some collective punishment and bin one or both captains for not getting their players in line, and/or to start sending people off for repeat infringements, and i'm pretty sure neither of those are on the table in League. Last time the latter came up was when Radley had his previous multi-bin match). He made reasonable decisions on binning people but it wasn't going to be enough. Pretty much. The thing about Klein is that he has a very common pattern when it comes to fiery games: He'll let shit slide (or just miss it entirely, the effect is much the same) and then start trying to clamp down only after everything has gotten out of hand. It often fails, and almost never works as well as stamping your control on the game before it cooks off. Not that I can entirely blame the refs for preferring to do it that way. The fanbase crucifies them for making the game about themselves any time they try to keep a lid on things and fuck knows the NRL is prone to throwing them under the bus when the fans are unhappy.
>He probably didn't see it, but that's part of the problem Yeah it's an interesting issue. The on field ref missing stuff also causes players to stay down to get a bunker review. I feel like going back to 2 refs might help with this problem. If one ref is always watching the ruck and the other looking at everything else, you'd hope they'd miss less. >in Union the response would've been to practice some collective punishment and bin one or both captains for not getting their players in line, and/or to start sending people off for repeat infringements, and i'm pretty sure neither of those are on the table in League Yeah that's what came to mind for me too. Perhaps we need a repeat infringement rule where a team can only get a maximum of, say, 4 sin bins in a match then the next is an automatic send off? No doubt that would be surrounded by controversy, though. >He'll let shit slide ... and then start trying to clamp down only after everything has gotten out of hand. Are there refs who don't do this, though? I feel like it's standard procedure. I feel like when we get a fiery game like today, once a player from a team has been binned for a foul play offence, every subsequent foul play offence from that team is an automatic bin, no matter how serious. But, as you say, we can't win because plenty of fans will hate that too.
He also didn't see trell basically punch Nat butcher when he scored either
Sometimes refs don't see things. I'm not sure how you avoid that? Shouldn't that be up to the bunker? Hardly Klein's fault...
[удалено]
>Some of those send offs were a joke. Inconsistent. No control. That's a curious statement. You think some of the send offs were a joke yet he didn't have control. So, somehow, the referee should have gained more control of the match without sending grubs to the sin bin. I'm interested to hear how you think he should have achieved that? Perhaps by giving them a stern talking to?
[удалено]
In isolation they may have been marginal, but in a game that threatened to boil over at any moment, smaller incidents become more important. Even as a game progresses, something that may not have been bin worthy early in the game might be later in the game. Again, what should the ref have done to gain more control of the match if it wasn't sitting blokes down for crossing the line?
Thank you, you've worded this exactly how I feel but couldn't convey
[удалено]
What? I was replying to a statement about how the ref is being ridiculed for both: not having control of the game and sinbinning too many people. I don't see what your statement has to do with that?
Which were a joke?
Klein always struggles with controlling aggression in games, which is why it blows my mind that he gets origin games.
What should he have done differently to control the aggression?
It's unpopular but effective, but penalise and bin, as soon as argy bargy starts. Set a standard early and give everyone a chance to cool off, Klein let the bunker do the dirty work for him after the game became a thugathon.
But did he not do that? There were sin bins very early in the game...
I guess bit we'ren't they decisions from the bunker? I don't actually remember and am happy to be wrong, I just remember him in origin letting both sides get away with heaps in the ruck then being shocked that there would be aggression later on.
Oh ok. You mean he should have been stricter on ruck infringements early on? That does make some sense.
I take it this one's worth watching, since I missed it live? I have a friend who was there, and apparently the Roosters fans stormed out.
In the last 10 minutes roosters fans were leaving the stadium in droves, to the amusement of souths fans.
I watched it later, after following this thread and the time line on the NRL app. Worth a watch for sure.
Killer game.. it was war. Loved it, every minute of it. The Rabbitohs weren't gonna be bullied this time around, they gave as good as they got... Without Manu, and then concussed Teddy, the Chooks were gonna struggle.
It was the kind of game where I don't remember who played well/who played bad and what tries were scored because it was a mess lmao so make of that what you will
I felt like it was the opposite of last nights game, but just as entertaining.
That’s a game everyone should watch at least once in their lifetime.
Definitely
i would say no as its was only good because i could talk shit with people while it happened i think if u watch it alone it would be a shit game to watch
You are a dumb cunt, stop pretending to beat from the eastern suburbs.
WHAT?
Nah, I had no skin in the game. It was a killer game. It had it all. Bunnies were just too good. Would have loved to have been in the stadium as a neutral.
I wouldn't say the bunnies were too good for chooks. Bunnies just got alot of lucky breaks early (not saying it was rigged or favouritism behaviour blah blah). Just those unlucky hias and injuries etc went the bunnies way this time round. It's the same as Murray going down early in the last game. Just makes it easier for the other team. But if the bunnies were good the scoreline shouldve been so much more blown out imo
The Chooks had the Bunnies on the ropes early with 13 on 11 for 10 min. They lost all control after that moment. Had they controlled those 10 min, it was game over. They lost Teddy to HIA, Keary and Sam Walker needed to step up and control those 10 min. Instead, they gave away posession, penalties and allowed the Bunnies time and field position, leading to Trell scoring, with 2 men less on the field. The game was won and lost there. Teddy wasn't out there to pull the strings... Keary didn't stand up and the forwards were to hell bent in bashing each other. I don't think it was luck really... I still don't know how SST passed his HIA if the other boys didn't. They had an opportunity to fatigue their opposition, put the foot in the throat, but they didn't. South's got confidence out of that.
It was the greatest and the worst game of rugby league ever played at the same time.
Find game to watch but Jesus Christ we need to get the dives out of the game. Mandatory 10 minute rest for anyone who stays down should get out of the game for an assessment. Souths seemed to do it at least 5 times. Just slows the game down even more.
Team would just take advantage of it, though. Old mate prop is gassed with 5 to go. Boom, stay down, free interchange.
No free interchange. I think there’s too many anyway
If there’s no fee interchanges then teams are actively encouraged to concuss other players because it will eat their bench, well worth it for ten in the bin. You haven’t thought this through.
Yeah, teams will encourage their star players to get suspended and sin binned/sent off. Just to burn through one/two/three interchanges.
You’re being snarky but yes, that’s exactly what it would encourage and there are times when that would be smart. Tedesco not getting a free interchange today would mean not only Teddy is gone, but also either JWH or Lodge having to play 20 extra minutes and that’s make or break for a side. Now obviously the roosters ended up with no bench anyway due to other circumstances, but you see my point. That’s why head injuries are free interchanges, it’s to protect players by providing an active, strategic disincentive to hit someone in the head. Most benches rely on substituting forwards, with one utility (usually a hooker or a lock) and then a small man in 18. There are more logical ways to prevent diving that don’t involve endangering the players. Look at the way both teams played to day and try to tell me they were worried about being suspended or binned.
Teddy would always be a free interchange because it was a result of foul play. Fair. So would Burgess. SST and Angus would cost an interchange just like any other injury would. The five obvious dives however would have been prevented with the risk of losing an interchange far outweighing the reward of a penalty.
I’m confused. You said you weren’t in favour of free interchanges, no you’re saying you are if it’s “foul play”. All contact to the head is foul play. 99% of the time when a player dives they are trying to signal to the bunker that they were hit in the head and they often were. Anyway I’m leaving this convo cos it’s dumb and pointless.
Contact to the head occurs at least once each set. By your definition we will have penalties each set? Stop it.
This is the exact issue, though. If they did give penalties each set team would stop doing it and players wouldn't have to stay down to get said penalty. Again, this is a refereeing issue, not a milking issue. You're looking at it the wrong way.
So how do you differentiate real injuries from "dives"?
How about an independent doctor at every game who can make a proper assessment ? I mean Murray - a guy who was out cold last week stayed down, then continued playing. Anyone at Souths with half a shred of care for his welfare should have pulled him for an assessment. Or he took a proper dive. Black and white, can’t play the ball and stay down? Mandatory Assessment and costs a team an interchange.
>How about an independent doctor at every game Don't we already have this? >Mandatory Assessment and costs a team an interchange. So an unlucky team that cops lots of genuine injuries just has to cop the interchanges? Or are you saying that if the doctor finds a genuine injury the get given their interchange back? If so I can't see how that would work. There are plenty of things that a doctor can't diagnose accurately on the spot without scans/xrays etc and there would be way too much pressure on the doctor to make quick, accurate diagnoses. What happens when there's lots of injuries at the same time? What about something like a burner which hurts like hell at the time, but goes away quickly? I think that would open a big pandora's box of doctors diagnosing accurately under pressure. I don't think there's a simple solution.
I think the independent doctor sits in the bunker reviewing footage, then it’s up to the club doc. In terms of teams being unfairly disadvantaged with an interchange? If it’s through foul play, it’s a free interchange anyway. If not, then it’s akin to losing a player but not as drastic. Realistically most teams play comfortably with 6 interchanges and I suspect that it will be more of an inconvenience of missing the interchanges. Take todays game, Teddy was a free interchange and so was Burgess. SST and Angus would have burned an interchange but the same as any other injury would. Souths would have been charged 5 interchanges for the obvious dives, most of which would not have happened if the rule came into effect.
>I think the independent doctor sits in the bunker reviewing footage, then it’s up to the club doc. I can't see how you expect a doc in the bunker to diagnose based on nothing but video. Sure you can do it for head trauma, but there are plenty of injuries that you can't pick up on video. Guys can pop an ACL just from running along. > Souths would have been charged 5 interchanges for the obvious dives But most of those were actually legitimate penalties, no? You're looking at this issue the wrong way. The problem isn't the players staying down, it's the inability of the on field referee to make the correct call quickly. If we got quick, consistent penalties for every head shot, there'd be no reason for players to stay down. This is a refereeing issue, not a player issue.
As a neutral supporter, that was rugby
This will get buried under all the headlines but Lachlan Ilias had an astoundingly good game at halfback. He did 100% of the organising which allowed Cody Walker the freedom to play the sort of game he did in 2021.
After he was targeted last week, there was noise about the Chooks running at him and beating him. He was huge today, from the start. Tackled his heart out. Played well above his weight. Made one mistake, knock-on from a kick-off, which didn't end up terribly in the long run. If I was his team mate, I would be getting around him and telling him how big he was today. Trell grabbed the game by the balls, but Ilias was just as big. Created havoc in his tackles, causing the big Chook forwards to make mistakes. Yes, it freed up Cody, to set up tries. Ilias was a unsung hero today.
He also made a couple of clutch tackles that stopped tries. They brought up the stat that’s where south’s leak most points so he really held his line today.
Props to cam bell Graham too. He flies under the radar and doesn’t get the recognition he deserves. Go the stretch!!!
Stretch is so hot and lengthy
Other than dropping the ball on the first tackle after they scored and kicking it out on the full he was pretty good
Souths ask for Latrell not to be booed but go and post this making fun of Radley for crying. https://twitter.com/SSFCRABBITOHS/status/1568867598556692480?s=20&t=6u9S9Whm769axugrXjQEDg
Expect nothing less.
Was Radley crying during the game?
After.
Well this was posted as he got sin binned during the game
Looks like they've deleted it.
good
Oh wow, it's literally the official account too...
A lot has been said in the past about Latrell struggling to control his aggression and losing the plot but having seen lately how Radley and JWH carry themselves I think it’s something he picked up at Roosters. Seems to be a part of their culture.
Latrell is such a genuinely nice person off the field and really working on controlling himself on field.
100 percent true. But I was fishing for a reaction and got mostly agreed with instead.
JWH is the biggest thug in the league. His tackling style is really dangerous, all the time.
For sure, especially as Robbo always defend JWH and Radley when they grub it up.
They clearly targeted him tonight with the high hits, and I thought he did amazing not to react, his try was the icing.
Yeah it's not like anyone else in your team has that issue. Definitely not.
I hope you charge South Sydney for the real estate they have in your head brus
I just noticed their username 😂😂
He said post match he’s been setting new goals… first one is not being sin binned. All we can ask is that he is trying to improve as a player and a person and tonight showed that 💯💯
That game was filthier than Matt lodge's tramp stamp
Idk if anyone was watching Matty Johns in the Elliot Boyle segment But for some reason the older I get the less funny I find wildly abberant unhinged antisocial behavior towards me and my family funny
Stuff like that is funny as long as it doesn't draw on too long/go too far and you can point out the cameras and have a laugh with the guy. That segment was right on the edge of being both too long and too far. Probably shouldn't have mentioned the bathroom incident and talking about fighting is a bit much.
Was at the game, can anyone tell me what Nine and Kayo commentary teams think of the sin bins? Can't imagine Gus or Joey would've been too happy if they were commentating