Post Match NRL 2016 - Round 15 - Warriors vs Roosters Post Match Discussion

Game Information

Vs

01 Jan 1970 12:00
minute

How did Ken Maumalo and Toafofoa Sipley go?

  • Ken Maumalo - Great

  • Ken Maumalo - Good

  • Ken Maumalo - Passable

  • Ken Maumalo - Below average

  • Ken Maumalo - Should never play NRL again!

  • Toafofoa Sipley - Great

  • Toafofoa Sipley - Good

  • Toafofoa Sipley - Passable

  • Toafofoa Sipley - Below Average

  • Toafofoa Sipley - Should never play NRL again!


Results are only viewable after voting.
What I really liked was a gutsy performance from a very talented Roosters team who were hurting from the week before.

Johnson wasn't 100%
TL went off early
Roache to the wing
Maumalo sin bin
Roosters offside all day

All that and we still won.

Today is a good day.

MOM Luke. Made heaps of metres and kicked 4 from 4. I don't care that they were all pretty easy, it's pressure moments and you have to take them.

Agreed. I believe we should play to minimize the referees. Then we won't need the rub of the green or the 50/50 calls.
 

gREVUS

Long live the Rainbows and Butterflies
Contributor
lol at roosters fans calling conspiracy, they still don't get they are the most undisciplined team in the compo_Oo_O

View attachment 18972
I disagree with the comment that they are undisciplined. I think they played a very deliberate game with penalties conceded as they needed them. SKD was their best player of the day and gave up the most penalties, i think all on defense. Lets be honest if they arent going to sideline you, why wouldnt you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bruce

eudebrito

|-|
Contributor
Bit annoying no one asked McFadden what he thought about the roosters deliberate infringing in the presser, does the “can’t comment on refereeing” apply to the press as well? It’s not like they are disputing the refs call, as they were (mostly) penalised correctly.

It’s not a good look at all, actively makes the game worse to watch when one team can’t capitalise on their line breaks due to cheating. Not like they are the only team – the Cowboys are almost as bad, their coach spent time at the roosters too.

Hoffman did one too when Vete and TL went down, wasn’t off a line break, but pretty smart play with 11 guys left standing.

Players should do it more in those circumstances, might have been the 2nd storm game, Lolohea went down, no fullback in defence, just try to kill the play straight away, didn’t or couldn’t, storm run in an easy try.

But when it happens over and over.. because it’s an origin week between the NZ team and an also-ran, doubt the media will pick up on it, but they really need to start banging the drum before the finals come around, or it will turn into a goal kicking contest.
 

gREVUS

Long live the Rainbows and Butterflies
Contributor
I think 3 out of 10 is massively harsh. He made one poor error, but it was certainly no guarantee he was going to score, they'd slid across easily because of the lob pass. The sin bin - he turned slowly, but once he had, he did exactly the right thing, ensure your opponent doesn't score. He kept charging it when we needed energy, he worked his backside off.

There's more to being a winger other than scoring tries. Sure, Fusitua is well ahead of him, but Ken is a young kid who wasn't overawed. Often you see these young kids come in and sit back a bit, in fact I thought Ken did that a lot last year. Here when the going got tough he got amongst it.

I need to see him with a shot at the line to see how that part of his game has evolved. He's been scoring well in reserve grade and in that NSW rep game.
IMO what ken did was a professional foul and should have been a penalty try. The fact that he got sent off and they scored while he was off only balanced the books. And while he showed more heart in that game than ive ever seen from him before, it worries me that they are still so reliant on backs trucking the ball up so early in the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bruce and Xfactor

gREVUS

Long live the Rainbows and Butterflies
Contributor
Bit annoying no one asked McFadden what he thought about the roosters deliberate infringing in the presser, does the “can’t comment on refereeing” apply to the press as well? It’s not like they are disputing the refs call, as they were (mostly) penalised correctly.

It’s not a good look at all, actively makes the game worse to watch when one team can’t capitalise on their line breaks due to cheating. Not like they are the only team – the Cowboys are almost as bad, their coach spent time at the roosters too.

Hoffman did one too when Vete and TL went down, wasn’t off a line break, but pretty smart play with 11 guys left standing.

Players should do it more in those circumstances, might have been the 2nd storm game, Lolohea went down, no fullback in defence, just try to kill the play straight away, didn’t or couldn’t, storm run in an easy try.

But when it happens over and over.. because it’s an origin week between the NZ team and an also-ran, doubt the media will pick up on it, but they really need to start banging the drum before the finals come around, or it will turn into a goal kicking contest.
When we talk about the ref missing the deliberate offside, can anyone remind me what are the touchies actually out there to do nowadays? I thought they got to rule on the 10 etc? but im sure not seeing them doing anything. Because if they want to stop the roosters and teams like that 5 quick penalties in the first 5 mins of the game for not getting back or being offside would sort them out quick smart.

And thats why i believe in technology as a solution. A line on the screen showing the 10 and a bunker ref connected to a buzzer that he only uses that sounds in the refs ear if a player impedes. Simple fast and effective.
 
IMO what ken did was a professional foul and should have been a penalty try.

Agree it was a professional foul, but as Maxwell explained to Friend - they couldn't "award" a penalty try due to the proximity of other warriors players. Basically, for it to be a penalty try these days they have to be 99.25% confident the player would have scored without stuffing it up ;) (the percentage number is made up in case anyone's wondering, but that's the way it seems).
 

gREVUS

Long live the Rainbows and Butterflies
Contributor
Agree it was a professional foul, but as Maxwell explained to Friend - they couldn't "award" a penalty try due to the proximity of other warriors players. Basically, for it to be a penalty try these days they have to be 99.25% confident the player would have scored without stuffing it up ;) (the percentage number is made up in case anyone's wondering, but that's the way it seems).
Yea but thats shit and we know it. That was a penalty try every day. The other players didnt touch the ball (hell they didnt get near it) and as the only player who would have made it in time he was taken out. Unless your saying that one of the other Warriors players would have taken him out, which again would have made it a penalty try.

under current thinking they might as well remove the penalty try altogether as there is always the chance he will trip over his own shoelaces. Plus to cause a penalty try you have to be close enough to obstruct, other wise it wouldnt even be a question as he would have scored unimpeded
 
Yea but thats shit and we know it. That was a penalty try every day. The other players didnt touch the ball (hell they didnt get near it) and as the only player who would have made it in time he was taken out. Unless your saying that one of the other Warriors players would have taken him out, which again would have made it a penalty try.

under current thinking they might as well remove the penalty try altogether as there is always the chance he will trip over his own shoelaces. Plus to cause a penalty try you have to be close enough to obstruct, other wise it wouldnt even be a question as he would have scored unimpeded

Oh I completely agree, it's a load of crap. But that's the way they rule shit currently. It's a joke and has been for years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gREVUS

eudebrito

|-|
Contributor
When we talk about the ref missing the deliberate offside, can anyone remind me what are the touchies actually out there to do nowadays? I thought they got to rule on the 10 etc? but im sure not seeing them doing anything. Because if they want to stop the roosters and teams like that 5 quick penalties in the first 5 mins of the game for not getting back or being offside would sort them out quick smart.

One ref does the 10 metres, one watches the ruck, isn’t it? Touchies only seem speak up on a fwd pass once in a blue moon, probably missed some from the warriors TBH.

It’s not like the refs aren’t aware of infringing, especially during origin or other big games, you can see when penalties are coming, usually the 2nd time a team infringes in quick succession they call it, trying to manage the game, instead of enforce the rules to the letter, which technology would force them to do.

Not bad idea in theory, if they pinged every hand on the ball, or every running behind your own player when going side to side, games would be very stop-start affairs, media like the blame refs for ruining the contest, even if it’s the players at fault.
 

Dixpat

In Andy we (have to) trust
Contributor
Oh I completely agree, it's a load of crap. But that's the way they rule shit currently. It's a joke and has been for years.

I take you back to a thread I started in April where the OP was

We have had 3 occasions recently where there was consideration of a penalty try and in each the try was denied

The common comment for the denial is the fact that the ball was not in possession of the offended against player and one cannot be sure that he would have gained possession

Another comment is that there are other defending players in the vicinity

I recall Harrigan saying after a PT was awarded to the Warriors in a play-off game some years ago at Mt Smart that a PT decision is made on the premise that the offending player is not there

In last nights [Cowboys v Eels] the only reason Morgan knocked the ball forward when attempting to score was the fact he was being restrained by Norman

Question to the forum - can someone please think of a scenario where a penalty try would be awarded using the current decision making process

The starting point has to be that the ball must be in the players possession and there must not be other defending players in the vicinity.

The only sort of scenario I can think of is the defender commits an act of foul play* on the attacker sufficient to stop the attacker grounding the ball when the attacker is in the act of scoring

* leg trip, hit to the head etc.


At least they were consistent in Saturday's incident
 
  • Like
Reactions: gREVUS and Jay M
At least they were consistent in Saturday's incident

Agreed. They were consistent with the decision. It's just the rules surrounding that part of the game are rubbish.

That being said though... I can think of quite a few players and coaches who given the choice would rather concede a penalty try than have someone in the bin for 10 minutes... Personally, I've always wondered if it shouldn't be 10 in the min AND a penalty try... That would really stop a few professional fouls occurring ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: bruce and gREVUS

gREVUS

Long live the Rainbows and Butterflies
Contributor
One ref does the 10 metres, one watches the ruck, isn’t it? Touchies only seem speak up on a fwd pass once in a blue moon, probably missed some from the warriors TBH.

It’s not like the refs aren’t aware of infringing, especially during origin or other big games, you can see when penalties are coming, usually the 2nd time a team infringes in quick succession they call it, trying to manage the game, instead of enforce the rules to the letter, which technology would force them to do.

Not bad idea in theory, if they pinged every hand on the ball, or every running behind your own player when going side to side, games would be very stop-start affairs, media like the blame refs for ruining the contest, even if it’s the players at fault.
Your right that they tend to try and manage the game. That i think is a big part of the problem. When they manage, what they are doing is selectively choosing which rules to enforce and when to make a better game. In there opinion. And thus the issue. By not playing the game to the rules they start to predict results and manage towards them. I dont mean that they deliberately screw one team over another, but we know that when they train they look at past games to see what player did what in the past and what to ping them for. Thus trying to predict the game instead of playing whats infront of them.

Next week you watch SKD he will either get pinged and sent for 10 mins in the bin in the first half or he will not put a foot out of line and a different player will give all the penalties and they will get away with it again. All because the ref next week will have watch this game and be focused on him. But if the ref just played what was in front of him instead of trying to manage the game this wouldnt need to happen next week it would have happened this week.

I also dont buy that playing to the rules would create a stop start game. I think it would be rough maybe for a week or two, but then after that it would become the norm and players would adapt to the changes like they always do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Freddie Futler
Yet the obvious is the most frequently ignored or more so 'downed played.

Actually in in the false economony of attacking flair that is the Warriors, ...the truism that is the last four years is points coneeded....the for and against....forget the for....its the against.

Cappy gets it in the neck, so its timely after a crude game like that to ask the question, was it our recent shift in adjusting to the players preferred second phase game that got the result ? Or was it simple buy in to basic Aussie coaching style tennents (like kick penalties, make your tackles, do the boring stuff well).

I wager the difference between this game and the last two blow outs, is that when the Warriors have a defensive line in their faces (whether illegally like last night, or quassi Legally by the line speed of the better sides or the shallow ten meters granted to home teams) ....in such pressured conditions.....having 'out score the opposition mentality....is limiting this club.

The line in the sand, the foundation stone, has to be a bed Rock of defence.

No matter how many exciting players we throw into this team, no matter how rejigged the coaches plans are adapted to suit our so called Warrior ball, even seriously weakened teams can cynically disrupt a team that is so heavily reliant on second phase and running.

We won because the Roosters could only scrape together ten points.

Really looking forward to seeing what they do against the Sharks.
Sorry, you quasi lost me... mostly boredom 3 sentences in
 

bruce

Contributor
Oh I completely agree, it's a load of crap. But that's the way they rule shit currently. It's a joke and has been for years.
Billy Harrigan didn't shirk his duty in the grand final between Melbourne and St George years ago. Things have been different since.
Personally, I've always wondered if it shouldn't be 10 in the min AND a penalty try... That would really stop a few professional fouls occurring ;)

It would have to be both and may be why they are leaving it as it is. If they had awarded a penalty try on Saturday they would have converted it from in front.