Will eels benefit from that terrible organ call, with a send off, does he miss the weekends game?
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
More stuff to read
"NOS, that's a fascinating train of thought. Many here will call you crazy, but I like the idea.
Realistically we are not competing next year, so the earliest window for us is 2028 anyway, and Moses is on the downhill slope now, so maybe it is time…"
Realistically we are not competing next year, so the earliest window for us is 2028 anyway, and Moses is on the downhill slope now, so maybe it is time…"
"I guess the argument is "why should clubs be punished for something that happens in a rep match?"
On the flipside, many of the punishments are meant to be deterrents for foul play, like head contact. By reducing the punishments, it could be…"
On the flipside, many of the punishments are meant to be deterrents for foul play, like head contact. By reducing the punishments, it could be…"
"Randy, yep, I have. Did you? Yellowstone was good, but Landman is even better. Surprisingly. It has wicked humour, and cuts deeper and spills more oil than its Wildcat drills."
"I think TB makes his debut this week. Fingers crossed for the big fella."
Replies
Great point Chief. Same with Matty yesterday morning saying he was sure Dylan Lucas would come onto the bench.
Hilarious that this was a fine only.
Some players simply can't get suspended no matter how hard they try.
By Klein standard (which he's set over many years of Origin) this was a sendoff - he's done it multiple times before. By how fans WANT Origin to be played, it's probably play on, but this is a send off for the past 5 years of Origin.
The judiciary not backing his call especially given it was a Cat 2 sends a really confusing message as to whether the NRL actually care about head injuries and CTE or not. A non protected player would've been suspended for weeks.
So I've learnt this morning that the rules around punishment are different for rep games. The same charge would have resulted in Ponga missing 2 weeks if this was an NRL game. On the one hand I get it, but on the other it comes across as though head contact is less of a concern in rep games.
Meelky.....don't mention the war!
NRL hate Parra simple they would rather to
A. see the Eels fold
B. Merge with another club soley for the Stadium
C.Never asist them to win another premership (Ref's run the game as per NRL instructions)
Yeah the NRL would love to see one of the most supported and financially effective clubs fold.
LB, I think those two club characteristics you mentioned are unfortunately working against us. NRL and Vlandy know that the Eels will always be supported by fans and will always be financially be doing good regardless of our team standings in the league and so they NRL don't care about how we are treated by the refs and judiciary.
Yeah I agree. But want them to fold? Thats over the top.
They couldn't care less how we do but still want us in the comp to make money. They can easily have us lose after the court issue but they would never want us to fold as they use us for financial purposes.
Winning a comp won't bring much more fans to the club unlike teams like Penrith.
I do not understand the difference between illegal dangerous tackles and the consequences in a State of Origin match and a weekly NRL match! Why are the consequences lighter in an Origin match. Doesn't make sense
I guess the argument is "why should clubs be punished for something that happens in a rep match?"
On the flipside, many of the punishments are meant to be deterrents for foul play, like head contact. By reducing the punishments, it could be interpreted that illegal head contact is not as important in rep games.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next