The Penalty Theory

[Johnny Tobin]

Gould was the first to come up with a theory that we give penalties away on purpose to reset our defence. It's caught on like wildfire and is dangerous because the idiot refs act like it's true.

What a load of absolute rubbish.

I could cop it if the penalties were always on our line on the first tackle but they are all over the field - often on a late tackle or to get sides out of their end.

How can anyone seriously believe it?

This has been happening through a decade. Through five coaches. Through five skippers. Through dozens of different players.

Give me a break.

But we had better get used to the shafting. It won't be finishing soon.

The only bright side is that the penalties seem to decrease at the end of the season.

[IRoosterManI]

the difference is that we have been successful of late even as the most penalized team... so in order to make sense of that the media have come up with this insane idea that giving the other team more time with the ball is all part of our gameplan..... i feel dumber just typing out this theory i dont know how Phil Gould can say it on national TV.

[Guest]

JT surely you see that we often do deliberately give away penalties on our own line? That is a tactic, that's for sure. A poster put it very well earlier today, and that was our team would rather give away a penalty than give away 6 points.

The problem is the inevitable penalty inside the first 3 or 4 minutes. I often joke with the members around me at home games; 'how many tackles before we give away the first penalty?' Last year against Canberra i said it would be the second tackle of our first defensive set. I was wrong. IT was the first.

[Johnny Tobin]

I would agree that we occasionally give a penalty on the first or second tackle on our line but the bulk of the penalties are not there.

[Tommy Smith]

The penalties do indeed decrease in the big end of season games.

The Rabbits didn't know what to do without their piggy backs once Manly got back into the Prelim.

We're good enough to make the top 4 despite the reaming. And from there on we're battle hardened and feast on the halved penalty counts.

But as I pointed out a couple of weeks ago...Souffs had received 70 pens to our 35. That was over 7 rounds.

How is such a discrepancy possible? 10 pens received per game to 5. That's madness.

[Guest]

Gould was the first to come up with a theory that we give penalties away on purpose to reset our defence. It's caught on like wildfire and is dangerous because the idiot refs act like it's true.

What a load of absolute rubbish.

I could cop it if the penalties were always on our line on the first tackle but they are all over the field - often on a late tackle or to get sides out of their end.

How can anyone seriously believe it?

This has been happening through a decade. Through five coaches. Through five skippers. Through dozens of different players.

Give me a break.

But we had better get used to the shafting. It won't be finishing soon.

The only bright side is that the penalties seem to decrease at the end of the season.

I said the same thing last year mate.

After we played Newcastle Bennett was one of the first to say it, that week on Sterlo they showed our penalties and most were up the other end.

It's a complete and utter lie and anyone that thinks it's a tactic is ****ing clueless.

They came up with the "theory" because despite massive counts we were still winning games by 30 points. So the "experts" thought it must be a tactic.

And I agree 10000% when the big games come around the whistle goes in the pocket.

We just have to get there fit and we will be hard to hold out.

[Johnny Tobin]

Yes Souffs are, as usual, the polar opposite of us. They constantly get penalties to get out of their own end and concede hardly any.

That's why they can carry those fat turds in their pack. They always have the ball in good position and never have to defend.

But in the semis the party is over. When they have to get down and dirty to gain advantage they go to water.

Last season was their last chance to win the comp. They have the worst three-quarters in the comp and their rift makes ours look like The Brady Bunch.

[Guest]

I said the same thing last year mate.

After we played Newcastle Bennett was one of the first to say it, that week on Sterlo they showed our penalties and most were up the other end.

It's a complete and utter lie and anyone that thinks it's a tactic is ****ing clueless.

They came up with the "theory" because despite massive counts we were still winning games by 30 points. So the "experts" thought it must be a tactic.

And I agree 10000% when the big games come around the whistle goes in the pocket.

We just have to get there fit and we will be hard to hold out.

Yes these so called 'experts' who often played the game once themselves and their job now is to watch and analyse the game have absolutely no idea; whereas a couch coach like yourself can come in and know what's up. Ridiculous.

[Johnny Tobin]

I have one word for you - Ikin.

[Guest]

I have one word for you - Ikin.

What about him?

[Guest]

I have one word for you - Ikin.

LOL

Nah Kegs is right maybe we should ask the father in law?

hahahahahaha

[Johnny Tobin]

What about him?

He has absolutely no idea. Having glasses doesn't make you smart.

[Guest]

He has absolutely no idea. Having glasses doesn't make you smart.

Whilst he may be one in the 'not so good' category, he knows a helluva lot more than fitzy.

[Johnny Tobin]

I beg to differ.

[Guest]

Then why isnt fitzy on NRL on Fox, or 360, and all that good stuff?