NRL 2014 Melbourne Storm discussion thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Andronicus said:
Ah.

A good mature attitude to have then.

If you have a really close look, you will see that it is a discussion thread.......not a board that should act as a safe house for Storm supporters only. The thread title is 2014 Melbourne Storm Discussion thread. There is no small print that I can see that says "if you don't love the storm and write things that storm fans want to hear, then please don't upset us by giving your opinion or we will tell you to **** off"
Click to expand...

It's a team thread, discuss away just don't be surprised by what is discussed in here.

Certainly won't tolerate opposition team trolling.
 
Not sure there has been any trolling.

Has been purely Storm related discussion too. If you are going to call any discussion that you don't like trolling, then good luck to you.
 
pantskyle said:
Who's asking for it to be overturned?

The original decision was wrong, the video refs decision was also wrong.

Anyone with even half a brain knows the wrong decision was made.
Click to expand...

In your view the original decision was wrong. Guess what the ref has to be CERTAIN he saw it grounded to award a try on field, heck it is the first thing taught when learning to be a ref. You cannot be guessing. The ref made the right call after consulting the touch judge. Both of them didn't see the ball grounded. Was called a no try, that is 100% correct.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

bombersno1 said:
In your view the original decision was wrong. Guess what the ref has to be CERTAIN he saw it grounded to award a try on field, heck it is the first thing taught when learning to be a ref. You cannot be guessing. The ref made the right call after consulting the touch judge. Both of them didn't see the ball grounded. Was called a no try, that is 100% correct.
Click to expand...

Doesn't make it the correct decision, Can you get that into your head?
 
pantskyle said:
Doesn't make it the correct decision, Can you get that into your head?
Click to expand...

Yes it is the correct decision, you are asking the ref to GUESS! The ref has to be certain a try is scored on the field, it really is that simple. You are asking refs to guess and give 'tries' when both the touch judge and the ref both didn't think he scored. You can't just give a try because he ended in the in goal area, it isn't NFL! Unless the ref is certain he has the obligation to not award the try. Then it is up to the video ref to conclusively tell otherwise.
 
bombersno1 said:
Yes it is the correct decision, you are asking the ref to GUESS! The ref has to be certain a try is scored on the field, it really is that simple. You are asking refs to guess and give 'tries' when both the touch judge and the ref both didn't think he scored. You can't just give a try because he ended in the in goal area, it isn't NFL! Unless the ref is certain he has the obligation to not award the try. Then it is up to the video ref to conclusively tell otherwise.
Click to expand...

And the on field refs got it completely wrong thus the video ref should have corrected the decision. The try was clear as day.

I have no issue with the on field refs making incorrect decisions when those decisions are able to be rectified, in this case the video ref failed to correct it. The NRL needs to make sure that regardless of the onfield refs decision the video ref can correct it.

* everyone that watched the game with half a brain knows it was a try when it happened.
 
pantskyle said:
And the on field refs got it completely wrong thus the video ref should have corrected the decision. The try was clear as day.

I have no issue with the on field refs making incorrect decisions when those decisions are able to be rectified, in this case the video ref failed to correct it. The NRL needs to make sure that regardless of the onfield refs decision the video ref can correct it.

**** everyone that watched the game with half a brain knows it was a try when it happened.
Click to expand...

The on field refs didn't get it wrong, they called it as they saw it. They didn't see the ball touch the line. No replay showed the ball touch the line, all that was shown was the ball over the line, big difference, one is not a try mate. I would rather refs not guess and award 'tries' that they haven't seen grounded, and in this case as per the match report, refs report and Tony Archer(head of refs), they didn't see the ball at any stage be grounded. It wasn't a wrong decision, it was nothing more than a 50/50 call, and that always goes with the on field decision. Most fans have agreed it was close and a 50/50 call, no issue with the ruling.
 
bombersno1 said:
The on field refs didn't get it wrong, they called it as they saw it. They didn't see the ball touch the line. No replay showed the ball touch the line, all that was shown was the ball over the line, big difference, one is not a try mate. I would rather refs not guess and award 'tries' that they haven't seen grounded, and in this case as per the match report, refs report and Tony Archer(head of refs), they didn't see the ball at any stage be grounded. It wasn't a wrong decision, it was nothing more than a 50/50 call, and that always goes with the on field decision. Most fans have agreed it was close and a 50/50 call, no issue with the ruling.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree.
 
I am not trolling i just watch a lot of league and the storm push the envelope re passes from dummy, guys shooting early before the ball is played, abd lieing on the ruck.

Canberra are fairly cleab n by comparison yet they still lost the penalty count.

Just face the fact that despite the above they were not good enough to stop paul vaughn from stepping through the middle of them to score.

And to be fair they break hard early and slide so hard early they deserve to be beaten on the inside.
 
papabear said:
I am not trolling i just watch a lot of league and the storm push the envelope re passes from dummy, guys shooting early before the ball is played, abd lieing on the ruck.

Canberra are fairly cleab n by comparison yet they still lost the penalty count.

Just face the fact that despite the above they were not good enough to stop paul vaughn from stepping through the middle of them to score.

And to be fair they break hard early and slide so hard early they deserve to be beaten on the inside.
Click to expand...

I reckon we were the better side on the day. Canberra got lucky, if that try was awarded we are home and the game is over.
 
With trousers like that?

In principle, though, I'm pleased to see the back of BotD, and also the point being made clear that refs will only give a try if they see it hit the turf, and no more of this "we didn't actually see, but surely he must have scored" mullarkey.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Billy Slater has turned to s**t.

An absolute useless player now. He has done nothing good on the field for a long time now and he cost us this game.

Completely done with him.
 
the 5th wiggle said:
Warriors too good tonight,its a shame they can't play that way every week,they'd be a pretty good side if they did.storm just not up to it this year.
Click to expand...

Warriors are a lot better then they have been playing.

Storm are cooked.
 
pantskyle said:
Billy Slater has turned to s**t.

An absolute useless player now. He has done nothing good on the field for a long time now and he cost us this game.

Completely done with him.
Click to expand...

Bit harsh...some decision making was ordinary...the kick after his break from the Bromwich pass and the last play of the match was dreadful, bit ordinary under the high ball at times however I notice now that a lot of side run a player who has no real intention of competing for the ball in the air but is able to make it look like they are trying to bat it back and the Refs deem that as OK, I think its a clear strategy and it works. I think Cronk is more out of form than Slater though....his decision making at the moment is ordinary. There were a few opportunities where the ball only needed to go through hands and we score yet cut outs or kicks were the option taken....we have simply forgotten how to win atm.
Lets not forget Sisa was on one leg from about the 5 minute mark and we lost O'Niell as well which hurt. we had enough opportunities to win but the Warriors taught us a thing about defence tonight.

No doubt it's going to be a tough year this year, we need to transition a few players and if you look at it, we are not that far from being only one loss to this point, however also not that far from being only one win....it's pretty much how it is.
 
kickthething said:
Bit harsh...some decision making was ordinary...the kick after his break from the Bromwich pass and the last play of the match was dreadful, bit ordinary under the high ball at times however I notice now that a lot of side run a player who has no real intention of competing for the ball in the air but is able to make it look like they are trying to bat it back and the Refs deem that as OK, I think its a clear strategy and it works. I think Cronk is more out of form than Slater though....his decision making at the moment is ordinary. There were a few opportunities where the ball only needed to go through hands and we score yet cut outs or kicks were the option taken....we have simply forgotten how to win atm.
Lets not forget Sisa was on one leg from about the 5 minute mark and we lost O'Niell as well which hurt. we had enough opportunities to win but the Warriors taught us a thing about defence tonight.

No doubt it's going to be a tough year this year, we need to transition a few players and if you look at it, we are not that far from being only one loss to this point, however also not that far from being only one win....it's pretty much how it is.
Click to expand...

Slater hasn't done a single good thing this season.

Either dropping the ball or trying to kick, just some terrible decisions.

I have no confidence when he has the ball.

Cronk has been fine has also had a few motm awards as well.

Kicking game is iffy though.
 
pantskyle said:
Slater hasn't done a single good thing this season.

Either dropping the ball or trying to kick, just some terrible decisions.

I have no confidence when he has the ball.

Cronk has been fine has also had a few motm awards as well.

Kicking game is iffy though.
Click to expand...

Don't agree w Cronk, I 've watch him closely and think he is over rated atm, as I said, his decision making...and kicking game haven't helped, however w Slater, it may be that a move to 5/8 could benefit the team if we have a fullback to come in? Probably worth trying a few things given a bottom 8 finish appears best we could really envisage this year. Thank God for the Bromwich boys, Procter and the forwards in general, I think they have been pretty good, Canberra aside, most of the defensive issues are wider of the ruck and our backline has largely misfired this year.

I still think we haven't really recovered from the Newcastle game, we just haven't been the same side since that night.
 
kickthething said:
Don't agree w Cronk, I 've watch him closely and think he is over rated atm, as I said, his decision making...and kicking game haven't helped, however w Slater, it may be that a move to 5/8 could benefit the team if we have a fullback to come in? Probably worth trying a few things given a bottom 8 finish appears best we could really envisage this year. Thank God for the Bromwich boys, Procter and the forwards in general, I think they have been pretty good, Canberra aside, most of the defensive issues are wider of the ruck and our backline has largely misfired this year.

I still think we haven't really recovered from the Newcastle game, we just haven't been the same side since that night.
Click to expand...

Bellamy will have to come up with something because something is wrong.
 
AuckMel said:
So, Hoffman off to the Warriors. Not sure about this one. Certainly been a good player.
Click to expand...

Yep, I'm glad, been poor and it should mean we keep Proctor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Aucklander
2024 Pre-season discussion
2 3
Replies
64
Views
2K
Jatz
Jatz
Aucklander
State of Origin Origin back to Melbourne in 2024
Replies
8
Views
771
PenrithGWS
PenrithGWS
Exe Gesis
General Rugby League Discussion
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
Exe Gesis
Exe Gesis
moto748
Thread to discuss the rules of the game and refs' interpretation of them
Replies
1
Views
632
moto748
moto748
Aucklander
The 2024 other sports thread
2 3 4 5
Replies
100
Views
5K
Jatz
Jatz

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top