What makes you go WTF???

[GIGS20]

Is it the Rebels saying no or RA not willing to take on their debt. RA have enough of their own.

I can't understand how the Rebels has been run so poorly for so long and multiple times.

The story about the Rebs not signing on was shortly after the Tahs committed, they joined up with the Reds and the Brumbies in saying no to administrative centralisation.

A telling move since it has become obvious that they are in far greater need than the Tahs were.

RA have committed to keeping them going for 2024 so will be covering most of the costs anyway, just not clearing debt. With the roster the Rebs have bought, you'd think that the operating costs will be plenty.

[Burgs]

Why is it that "A gentle reminder" unsolicited email grinds my gears so much!?!
I'm sure it wouldn't annoy me quite as much without the word "gentle".
You sent me an unsolicited email, generally for my website that doesn't and never has existed, and then have the audacity to give me a "gentle" reminder to be in contact... FFS!

[shasta]

You may be missing out on a fortune waiting for you at the Nigerian Treasury.

[Burgs]

Just been reading through this Roar article & comments.
I'm all for leftfield ideas and well articulated articles, but this one should have stayed on the pillow. (AKA "you're f*ckin dreamin")
I could put up a case for a team by team situation (Raiders/Brumbies, Storm/Rebels and to a lesser partnership understanding Force/Bears) but to think one sport could successful takeover and long term run another sport, particularly where such length of animosity exists, it's just deluded.
A more believable option would be to go to the AFL to give NRL nightmares... maybe I should sign in and post that one...

10 reasons league and union should merge to become One Rugby - and give AFL nightmares

https://www.theroar.com.au/2024/02/2...fl-nightmares/

[shasta]

Just been reading through this Roar article & comments.
I'm all for leftfield ideas and well articulated articles, but this one should have stayed on the pillow. (AKA "you're f*ckin dreamin")

I read that and thought similar. I posted here years ago about the small area of that which made sense, it would be tougher now as I don't see the NSWRL or QRL running with it thesedays. But stranger things..... About 10 - 15 years ago Wayne Bennett & Doc Evans (the scrum doctor) tried to get both sides to look at joint junior development systems to cut duplication costs and keep the junior AFL operations at bay. Too late? Maybe but if RL is remotely interested, it is worth investigating.

[Burgs]

I could only see shared experiences being sustainable if the two teams involved had very strong anti poaching from each other guidelines in place.
However, I do agree purely in kumbya land that both codes could benefit in shared development and preseason fitness/S&C.

[shasta]

The theory was that as the lads (& ladettes) matured they would have a better idea of which way to go. But that, of course, doesn't take into account the persuasive power of NRL clubs contracting nowadays.

[Burgs]

Not pointing to any specific incident this weekend, just a general observation/impression.
Does anyone get the feeling that Channel 9 resent the fact they have Union, consider Stan a rival network and deliberately pit League v Union (or League over Union)?
I think Stan has been fantastic for the Code, particularly with the extra shows through the week and being receptive to feedback, but their Big Brother seems to have no interest in promoting or even covering in the News/Sports each night.
There was a handful of ads leading into Round 1, but hardly anything else.
Be interesting what they are doing on the East Coast, if it is just a local thing?

[Burgs]

[jargan83]

He said that after the 4th Test, and while England had their moments where they probably could have taken control of Tests, I don't think the statement holds true. You don't trail a series 3-1 (at the time) being the better side.

[Burgs]

He said that after the 4th Test, and while England had their moments where they probably could have taken control of Tests, I don't think the statement holds true. You don't trail a series 3-1 (at the time) being the better side.

Even if you think it really hard, surely you have the situational awareness not to state it?!

[shasta]

So, I saw a random clip yesterday where a bloke soccered a ball near his 22, got a favourable bounce near half way which he deliberately headed over an opponent, regathered and went on to score. Ever seen that before??

[GIGS20]

So, I saw a random clip yesterday where a bloke soccered a ball near his 22, got a favourable bounce near half way which he deliberately headed over an opponent, regathered and went on to score. Ever seen that before??

Did the ball touch the ground or anybody else after the header?

I'm thinking Knock on might apply if it did, but would have to dissect the law pretty carefully to be sure.

[Sheikh]

Did the ball touch the ground or anybody else after the header?

I'm thinking Knock on might apply if it did, but would have to dissect the law pretty carefully to be sure.

I think that it would be OK even if it did touch the ground after the header, as a knock-on only applies to the ball having touched the hands. I've certainly seen reviews for knock-on where the ball touched the knee or some other part of the body where the TMO has ruled that as it didn't touch the hands it can't be a knock-on.

What could be interesting is if one player kicks the ball forward, then headers the ball further forward, and another player catches it and runs on. If the second player is onside at the kick, this should be legitimate, I think, as it's not a forward 'pass'.

[GIGS20]

I think that it would be OK even if it did touch the ground after the header, as a knock-on only applies to the ball having touched the hands. I've certainly seen reviews for knock-on where the ball touched the knee or some other part of the body where the TMO has ruled that as it didn't touch the hands it can't be a knock-on.

What could be interesting is if one player kicks the ball forward, then headers the ball further forward, and another player catches it and runs on. If the second player is onside at the kick, this should be legitimate, I think, as it's not a forward 'pass'.

Yeah I was running down the line of "not playing at" the ball. ie no deliberate attempt was made then it's all good. Interested to track down the intricacies though, Is knock on limited to hands and arms or not?