The hotdog smugglers management are working together with the NRL in trying to secure our home semi at Homebush. Roosters management are filthy.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Hotdog smugglers
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Spirit of 66 View PostUnlikely, I know, but it would be good to see the Storm beaten by the Panthers tonight and the Roosters run up a score against the Eels and snatch the Minor Premiership.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ChookMaster View Post
To be fair I thought both sin bins were warranted.. Napa got off lightly with the sin bin, he could of potentially been sent off. And latrell was offside and tackled a player when the broncs could of scored. Both were stupid errors from us.
- 2 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by milanja View Post
Why wouldn’t it be at Homebush if they get the home final?
However I don’t think we are guaranteed Allianz even if we do finish above them. I think the choice of Alliance or Homebush is at the NRLs discretion.
Anyway it’s starting to look more like we may finish first and play the sharks which would definitely be Allianz.
Comment
-
Pretty sure the top two earn the right to play the first finals at their home ground if they choose. Second week, the two losers from week one play at home against the winners from the bottom 4.Last edited by rented tracksuit; 08-31-2018, 07:59 PM.FVCK CANCER
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Thirteen View Post
But Brisbane infringed earlier in the play with a blatant shepherd.
Still, do you send a guy off for that? I dunno! IMO they couldn't have awarded a penalty try because it was not serious enough (and Cummins probably knew that the bunker would pick the shepherd if he sent it to them as a penalty try).
As much as I wanna agree with the call, IMO it really should been an offside call with a yardage kick or a tap being awarded. Instead, it was 2 points and a send-off, which I don't think was fair given that Cummins KNEW there the call would be NO TRY if he asked the bunker to check for a penalty try.
It was a malicious call IMO...
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ism22 View Post
I get the argument, but two wrongs don't make a right. Latrell was offside first, so the shepherd (which wasn't called by the ref) was always secondary.
Still, do you send a guy off for that? I dunno! IMO they ...
They're all offside at some point; every play! It's only when they infringe that it becomes an issue.
Comment
-
Originally posted by ism22 View Post
I get the argument, but two wrongs don't make a right. Latrell was offside first, so the shepherd (which wasn't called by the ref) was always secondary.
Still, do you send a guy off for that? I dunno! IMO they couldn't have awarded a penalty try because it was not serious enough (and Cummins probably knew that the bunker would pick the shepherd if he sent it to them as a penalty try).
As much as I wanna agree with the call, IMO it really should been an offside call with a yardage kick or a tap being awarded. Instead, it was 2 points and a send-off, which I don't think was fair given that Cummins KNEW there the call would be NO TRY if he asked the bunker to check for a penalty try.
It was a malicious call IMO...
Without doubt the Roosters were not good against Brisbane but the refereeing was absolutely disgracefulThe Internet is a place for posting silly things
Try and be serious and you will look stupid
sigpic
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Axe View PostRaiders got stitched tonight for the very same shepherd and the try was not awarded.
Same ref. Different outcome. Nrl = inconsistencyThe Internet is a place for posting silly things
Try and be serious and you will look stupid
sigpic
Comment
-
KB. Want bizarre.
riff player hits storm player after attacker falls into tackle. Up till late last year responsibility on tackling player. Right? This is what they said to Napa and boo.
anyway same ref as last week. No storm penalty.Written and published on behalf of the Liberal Party, Queensland
Comment
Comment