Match 2022 NRL Round 8 - Cronulla Sutherland Sharks Vs Brisbane Broncos @ Suncorp Stadium, Thursday 28th April 7.50pm

Match threads

Wizard

Great White
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
3,843
Reaction score
211
new rule: any sharks players that leaves our club only allowed to play in ESL. problem solved




so my covid theory wasn't that far off the mark

interesting you are allowed to play with the flu but not covid. the flu can be pretty dangerous too and alot of people wouldn't even be vaccinated against the flu at present
It’s a clown world
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
21,340
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Wild West
Yeh but having flu symptoms you would still be concerned it was going to go positive at some stage.

When our son had covid I could have sworn I had it even though was testing negative in RAT tests due to flu like symptoms.
Didn’t have PCR test though?
Heard of a lot of people testing negative on RATs but still having it.

NRL players might get full test if symptomatic
 

Super Impose

Great White
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
3,347
Reaction score
114
Location
The Hill
Didn’t have PCR test though?
Heard of a lot of people testing negative on RATs but still having it.

NRL players might get full test if symptomatic
Yeah the PCR is a much more thorough test - picking up the slightest of fragments ..

It’s why when you clear the 7 days you don’t get another PCR for 3 months because you will keep testing positive ..
 

The Punisher

Grey Nurse
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
521
Reaction score
155
Yeah the PCR is a much more thorough test - picking up the slightest of fragments ..

It’s why when you clear the 7 days you don’t get another PCR for 3 months because you will keep testing positive ..
Last week(Anzac day) i tested positive on a RAT.
My Wife & 2 year old daughter both tested negative on RAT but went for PCRs and were positve
So all 3 of us isolated together for 7 days , today is freedom day
 

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
16,754
Reaction score
457
Location
At the Tucky
It seems alot of Covid vaccinated people experience mild symptoms and can get over it in 3-7 days.

The FLU virus will knock you on your ass for 2-3 weeks+
It's horrendous - you know when you have cause it feels like you gunna or wanna die!

I think our players just had the head colds (Rhinovirus) that are going around not the actual FLU (Influenza). You would struggle to play with the actual FLU, it might even be dangerous as you should be resting and getting fluids.

Not easy with a Cold either mind you

If our players had the FLU it seems kinda silly to me they are allowed to play if you can't for the Corona Virus which most people actually are vaccinated against and can get over relatively quickly and is a variant of the FLU virus.

This is the new world we live in now though and I guess the rules and outlooks need to be updated while maintaining a sense of practicality so I'm not suggesting there's an easy solution at hand but we are in a different situation with the Corona Virus to what we were 2-3 years ago
 

MrDravid

Hammerhead
Joined
Apr 11, 2022
Messages
485
Reaction score
116
Couldn't help but notice, Cam McInnes didn't cop a charge for his "Crusher Tackle"
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
21,340
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Wild West
It seems alot of Covid vaccinated people experience mild symptoms and can get over it in 3-7 days.

The FLU virus will knock you on your ass for 2-3 weeks+
It's horrendous - you know when you have cause it feels like you gunna or wanna die!

I think our players just had the head colds (Rhinovirus) that are going around not the actual FLU (Influenza). You would struggle to play with the actual FLU, it might even be dangerous as you should be resting and getting fluids.

Not easy with a Cold either mind you

If our players had the FLU it seems kinda silly to me they are allowed to play if you can't for the Corona Virus which most people actually are vaccinated against and can get over relatively quickly and is a variant of the FLU virus.

This is the new world we live in now though and I guess the rules and outlooks need to be updated while maintaining a sense of practicality so I'm not suggesting there's an easy solution at hand but we are in a different situation with the Corona Virus to what we were 2-3 years ago
Had flu where I have been very sick for like a week, maybe a little over, don't think I've ever been sick 2+ weeks

Meanwhile here I am a month post covid still tired constantly...
 

apezza

Bull Shark
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
2,017
Reaction score
457
Couldn't help but notice, Cam McInnes didn't cop a charge for his "Crusher Tackle"
Surprise, surprise. We didn't deserve to win but geez these bunker decisions are killing teams.

That one against Canberra was terrible. Everyone could see he was milking.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
21,340
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Wild West
Surprise, surprise. We didn't deserve to win but geez these bunker decisions are killing teams.

That one against Canberra was terrible. Everyone could see he was milking.
Of course he was but I thought there was enough head contact to warrant the penalty under current interpretations.

There was never a crusher though. Our guys only drank light milk on two worse crushers than that during the game - unless Fitz is saying don't milk we just got very heavily incentivised to do so from now on
 

apezza

Bull Shark
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
2,017
Reaction score
457
I rather lose with integrity then start milking for a penalty to win a game.
 

Chad

Jaws
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
15,852
Reaction score
381
Location
The Ridge!
Of course he was but I thought there was enough head contact to warrant the penalty under current interpretations.

There was never a crusher though. Our guys only drank light milk on two worse crushers than that during the game - unless Fitz is saying don't milk we just got very heavily incentivised to do so from now on
I disagree mate. I thought it was very harsh on the Raiders. I thought there was hardly any head contact at all.

The point that others are trying to make is that the bunker is being very reactive at the moment. They get criticised for not sending Daniel Tupou to the bin last week so they are trying to make up for it. About the only one I have seen them get right this weekend was the Lawton send off. Other than that, it's been very poor by them.
 

Chad

Jaws
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
15,852
Reaction score
381
Location
The Ridge!
I rather lose with integrity then start milking for a penalty to win a game.
Unfortunately mate when games of football are on the line, then the coaches and players will do anything to win.

Wait until we get to the semis, we will have players laying down all over the place unless the NRL put a stop to it.
 

stormshark

Great White
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
4,835
Reaction score
88
Location
Phillip Island
I rather lose with integrity then start milking for a penalty to win a game.
You referring to that Lodge one yeah? Shocker, surprised Big Red didn't stamp his feet and protest more ( think he wasn't sure whether he got him or lodge faking)
 

apezza

Bull Shark
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
2,017
Reaction score
457
I disagree mate. I thought it was very harsh on the Raiders. I thought there was hardly any head contact at all.

The point that others are trying to make is that the bunker is being very reactive at the moment. They get criticised for not sending Daniel Tupou to the bin last week so they are trying to make up for it. About the only one I have seen them get right this weekend was the Lawton send off. Other than that, it's been very poor by them.
Yep that was my point. If the ref blows a penalty / put on report on the run and get it wrong I can cop that.

Some of the ones picked up by the bunker (the two McInnes ones as an example but it happens to every team) are a joke.

Don't get me started on the independent Doctor.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
21,340
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Wild West
I disagree mate. I thought it was very harsh on the Raiders. I thought there was hardly any head contact at all.

The point that others are trying to make is that the bunker is being very reactive at the moment. They get criticised for not sending Daniel Tupou to the bin last week so they are trying to make up for it. About the only one I have seen them get right this weekend was the Lawton send off. Other than that, it's been very poor by them.
But hardly any at all is a penalty currently

I definitely don't think that amount of head contacts by accident should be a penalty, but it has been relatively consistently this season.
Certainly I'd rather something like that not decide the game.

The Tupou one not being a sin bin was wrong by a big stretch, a very bad call by first ref and then bunker and went against how they have typically tried to referee this year. I do agree bunker very reactive etc
 

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
16,754
Reaction score
457
Location
At the Tucky
The officials and NRL would prefer to get criticized for over reacting penalising and reporting a player as you won't get sued for that in regards to player welfare

So I think the bias is going to be more on the penalise and report side than the let it go play on side where they could potentially find themselves in a stack of trouble for not protecting the players or at least appearing to

The world is run by Lawyers and Accountants not Doctors and Sports Officials
 

Chad

Jaws
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
15,852
Reaction score
381
Location
The Ridge!
But hardly any at all is a penalty currently

I definitely don't think that amount of head contacts by accident should be a penalty, but it has been relatively consistently this season.
Certainly I'd rather something like that not decide the game.

The Tupou one not being a sin bin was wrong by a big stretch, a very bad call by first ref and then bunker and went against how they have typically tried to referee this year. I do agree bunker very reactive etc
If you were in the bunker - and I mean just plain Bort, not under any potential instructions by anyone above you - would you have deemed it a penalty?
 

MrDravid

Hammerhead
Joined
Apr 11, 2022
Messages
485
Reaction score
116
But hardly any at all is a penalty currently

I definitely don't think that amount of head contacts by accident should be a penalty, but it has been relatively consistently this season.
Certainly I'd rather something like that not decide the game.

The Tupou one not being a sin bin was wrong by a big stretch, a very bad call by first ref and then bunker and went against how they have typically tried to referee this year. I do agree bunker very reactive etc
Is it still the Bunker is only allowed to step in when its a reportable offense?

I thought it pretty clear he was never going to get reported.
 

bort

Jaws
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
21,340
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Wild West
Is it still the Bunker is only allowed to step in when its a reportable offense?

I thought it pretty clear he was never going to get reported.
I believe bunker can rule on any instance of foul play.

I'm not sure exactly what the definitions are that require something to be reported or where a penalty suffices.
I do think it was not 'report' worthy... what is even the point of the report anymore? Report was so judiciary knew to look at it right? Now match review committee should not miss any penalty being charged that warrants it.

It would be awkward for bunkers ruling back to referee to be 'there is high contact but we don't see it as reportable, play on'

If you were in the bunker - and I mean just plain Bort, not under any potential instructions by anyone above you - would you have deemed it a penalty?
Tough question as if I was in the bunker I would obviously have instructions and interpretations I am expected to follow.
But I will say this, as a spectator I don't want it to be a penalty.
 
Top