Refs, commentators, and tactics

[Guest]

That's right, you do get arguments on forums, one more gold star and you'll be student of the week.

ill be good I swear.

[kurtsherlock6]

youre always going to get debates* on internet forums, as much as I piss ks6 off I would much rather debate with him than the rooster moronacle.

LOL, you dont piss me off mate.

[liver1971]

true, but when it is simultaneous like the SBW penalty was, I think it should be a play the ball.

"simultaneous " what ?
Touching the ground is touching the ground
You cant compare a refs call to making contact with the ground lol

[Guest]

"simultaneous " what ?
Touching the ground is touching the ground
You cant compare a refs call to making contact with the ground lol

touching the ground and passing simultaneously mate.

[liver1971]

Have you ever admitted you are wrong ?

[Guest]

Have you ever admitted you are wrong ?

yes, when I was wrong.
I cant be wrong stating an opinion.

[liver1971]

yes, when I was wrong.
I cant be wrong stating an opinion.

FMD - pass

[kurtsherlock6]

LOL, you dont piss me off mate.

I take that back.

[tri-hard]

Do you think we deserved an 11 -5 penalty count against us? Do you really think we were more than twice as ill disciplined as lol@souffs.??

I think all the penalties were penalties, Therefore the 'non conspiracy believers' will all tell us they were all warranted and maybe so. But by the same token there were quiet a few similar examples, from the opposition, that were totally ignored.

[kurtsherlock6]

I think all the penalties were penalties, Therefore the 'non conspiracy believers' will all tell us they were all warranted and maybe so. But by the same token there were quiet a few similar examples, from the opposition, that were totally ignored.

My point exactly.

[Guest]

I think all the penalties were penalties, Therefore the 'non conspiracy believers' will all tell us they were all warranted and maybe so. But by the same token there were quiet a few similar examples, from the opposition, that were totally ignored.

Some were warranted and some were Bullsh!t

[Kingbilly]

The SBW pass off the ground was def a penalty against him.
Maloney's "play on", I think we were a bit lucky and if they called it back to play the ball, I would not have whinged too much. But I am happy they called play on and can understand why.

When Maloney made the break and Ingli$ held him down, I didn't mind, Maloney was not really trying to get up quick and it gave time for Jennings (I think) to get there

I was reasonably happy with the refereeing in the second half especially because $ouff$ didn't get their helping hand penalties on the 4th and 5th tackles.

The commentary on the other hand (apart from Stirling) was typically attrocious. Its painfully obvious that Warren is way past it and painfully obvious who Gould had his money on.

[Guest]

You didnt answer my questions so i'll repeat them, "Do you think we deserved an 11 -5 penalty count against us? Do you really think we were more than twice as ill disciplined as lol@souffs.??"

If you think that sort of penalty count was warranted your fair dinkum off your head.

Absolutely not. Whilst the penalties against us may have been warranted, and I would debate the penalty when Inglis walked off the mark and was tackled by an offside marker (who he just walked by to play the ball), how many times did Luke push and hold down at the play the ball.

I said to someone the other day, the way to beat Souths is to bash G. Burgess. When his brothers see that, they go to water.

Mission accomplished.