You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
More stuff to read
"It shows a pretty direct correlation between set restarts & scorelines.
Which is nothing new really:
Possession / field position / points = fatigue / scoreboard pressure / stupid risks / errors for oppositions.
The NRL just found a new way to…"
Which is nothing new really:
Possession / field position / points = fatigue / scoreboard pressure / stupid risks / errors for oppositions.
The NRL just found a new way to…"
"fox is still injured"
"He is though but I agree yardage and bend the line first pass after."
"Need to focus on hanging onto the ball, especially after long periods of being under the pump.
Paulo, your job is to run straight and hard, win the contact before even thinking of an offload....... YOU ARE NOT A BALL PLAYER !
"
Paulo, your job is to run straight and hard, win the contact before even thinking of an offload....... YOU ARE NOT A BALL PLAYER !
"
Replies
When you lose by 50, you can't blame the refs for losing. However the refereeing was diabolical and should still be scrutinised. Chris Butler in particular needs to be held to account for his performance. 1st of all the knock on call that we challenged. Complete and utter incompetence at best. And secondly the Iongi head high not getting penalised. There's absolutely no excuse for the bunker to get those 2 calls so fundamentally wrong
Problem is while not changing the overall result in terms of win or lose, the terrible decisions often happen at crucial times, completely changing the momentum during that smaller period of the game. So often, just when a team is fighting their way back into the set for set arm wrestle, a diabolical decision just bursts the bubble.
That's nothing new though right I mean sticky was saying his team made 60 odd tackles before his team saw the ball and still came back and won.It feels like you could go to almost any contest any week and pick apart these wild inconsistencies within the bunker especially.IMO they need to empower the refs more and depower the bunker's decision making.Referees will get decisions wrong they will but I'd prefer that than a multi million dollar multi camera mess and still there getting it wrong alot of the time.I've never been a fan of the bunker and the game isn't played at 20 frames a second.
Exactly. Fans will be less frustrated with the actual referee sometimes getting 50/50 calls wrong. They usually even themselves out. What fans of the game can't cop though, is the bunker getting so many decisions obviously wrong after they have all the time in the world to review. It's just laughable. The NRL would be better off giving the bunker seat to a random fan as a lucky door prize. " OK fans, the bunker official for tonight will be" ...... drumroll... " Bay 221, Row G, seat 37 - Congratualtions and make your way to......"
They could not do a worse job than what we see from the bunker every game🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
We keep talking about the great Raiders come back after being down early 14-0. You know what helped? Raiders got 5-straight six-agains after the 8th min after Manly's lead. Every restart till fulltime, bar one. Restarts are worse than penalties because of the fatigue level and the defence doesn't have time to reset and get a breather.
Restarts
01:42 – Sea Eagles
02:24 – Sea Eagles
07:51 – Sea Eagles
08:12 – Sea Eagles
16:00 Sea Eagles 14-0
19:34 – Raiders
24:01 – Raiders
25:46 – Raiders
31:57 – Raiders
48:08 – Raiders
48:00 Sea Eagles 14-12 Raiders comeback
72:44 – Sea Eagles
Check play by play at https://www.nrl.com/draw/nrl-premiership/2026/round-1/sea-eagles-v-...
HOE - interesting that after blowing the pea out of the whistle for 48 mins (one set restart every 5 mins), there was only one blown in the last 32 minutes of the game. You can't tell me that players all of a sudden became ultra-disciplined.
Iamnot, spot on. Manly get 4-straight restarts. Lead 14-0. Then, Raiders get 5-straight restarts. They come back 14-12. Must be just pure co-incidence it keeps happening...
I used to think refs were just used as an excuse by coaches, but nowadays I'm starting to agree with them especially in the V'landys' restarts universe without accountability.
It shows a pretty direct correlation between set restarts & scorelines.
Which is nothing new really:
Possession / field position / points = fatigue / scoreboard pressure / stupid risks / errors for oppositions.
The NRL just found a new way to control momentum with 6-agains, as opposed to penalties. For some reason, there is more focus on penalty counts than restarts, and to your point HOE, penalties are a lot better to be against than restarts, especially against the Storm.
The other huge difference in the Raiders comeback, and why its not even a comparison is Manly are not the Storm. Manly might be fighting it out with bottom 4 this season, the Storm will be where they always are.
Hughes, Munster, Grant, Fa'ologo.
Give that spine an inch, or several metres as the officiating did, and they will destroy you to their credit.
Our errors were very disappointing, but errors can't really be looked at in isolation.
The disappointing thing from the Eels, imo, was the leadership not taking some control & just ensuring the Eels got to their kick for multiple sets. No offloads, forget the scoreboard, just get to the kick and let Moses win some field position.
Easier said than done of course.
The thing I have found interesting was when I did some digging on Kearney. It was brought up how Ryles is now Kearney, I came to see in 42 games as coach we only conceded 50 once under him.
in 25 games with Ryles 3 times. But also 6 again rule has made it that there are more higher scores. Thats how this rule has changed the game in that you look at more teams putting 50 on due to momentum being created purely from referee discretion not from skills of the attacking team.
Do we still lose on Thursday if 6 again wasn't a thing? Absolutely. Do we have 52 put on us? Not so sure.
Different game and different rules it's hard to compare really.
What I will say Kearney never amounted to much as a head coach and probably was just an assistant at best.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next