I personally was surprised that the Cowboys were given the ball after the their trainer interfered with play. I thought the Eels should have been given a penalty and the video ref should have examined if Ado Car could have scored as he's super fast and was definitely in a position to do so. Trainers shouldn't be allowed on the field during play or at least should remain out of the play area
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
Replies
It was ridiculous that the cows were not penalised. It changed the outcome of that play negatively for Parra. We may have scored or at least got a goal line drop out. If there are no consquenses to something like that he may as well have picked it up and passed it to the fullback.
Correct. How can there be no consequences for litrallly changing the segment of the game positively got his team. He ran straight through the play . If I'm running The NRL I'd have this fixed up in a jiffy , it's not hard to solve.
Theyd have to enter and exit the paddock behind their last line of defence player at all times unless attending to an injured player who's down and out of play . If they're simply running water , bullshit running repairs or messages , they'd have to enter the paddock from behind the line so they aren't running through the game.
They're supposed to be entering the field from an onside position. So, behind the ball. The other thing that pissed me off is the following Cowboys set, they had 2 trainers on the field the entire time they had the ball, through until after they had kicked the ball. Which is against the rules. Trainers have to be off the field unless tending to an injured player after tackle 4.
Yeah but behind the ball is shit , easy to still interfere. I'd have them entering from behind their deepest standing player. That way there's virtually zero chance of them getting in the way.
I notcied that too at the game, 2 trainers on the field until the ball was kicked on the 5th, just standing behind the play barking instructions. The NRL needs to tighten this up.
Alfie Langer did it all the time when he was trainer at the Broncos
Yep noticed that as well and the ref said nothing
100%, I commented to my mate they had two extra players as they were only just behind the play - absolute rubbish and the NRL needs to crack down or simply blow the whistle and award a penalty to the team in opposition
The fact they got the ball back after it was destined to head to the in-goal baffled me . Should've been scrum Eels , or as you say a penalty for offside. My understanding of the rules ihas always been a scrum as soon as it touches the trainer it's a dead ball. I'd have liked to have seen their ruling should it have deflected off him and onto one of our players who waltzed in for a try. I'd betcha they'd pack a scrum.
Back in the 2019 grand final, the rule was that the attacking side (side with the field position) would get the ball which is how the Roosters got it. They changed the rule to then say whichever team was in possession.
It should just be a penalty against the team whose trainer it hits, unless the trainer is actively treating an injured player. You can make it a differential penalty if you want, so it's not a shot at goal, but you can't be handing the ball back to a team who has caused the infringement.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 5 Next