Wigan kidded Bentham rotten all night. Everyone knows their tactics are very questionable but officials don't seem to have the bottle to deal with them. What made me chuckle was Wane in his post match interview when he said Wigan were the better team who dominated much of the match but they were on the receiving end of a lot of dubious calls. He managed to keep his face straight and seemed to actually believe it!!!!!!!!!
I expect this to change under Holbrook, so much is made these days in the NRL of metres made after impact and we simply don't do try to push through the line. Richards cops a lot of stick but I would guarantee he's coached to drop on impact in an attempt to force a quick ptb, as you say though the rules enable defenders to negate this yet we didn't catch on under Brown or Cunningham.
A dominant tackle is a different kind of tackle - one where the first direction after contact (for the attacker) is backwards i.e. negative yards after contact. A surrender tackle is where the attacker drops to the ground without an attempt to break the line / break the tackle so is slightly different. Both are license to take longer on the tackle though.
Agree. Furthermore - this rule seems to allow any player who has no chance of catching a high ball simply to jump up and make sure he is 'contacted' by an opposing player nearby. Any subsequent try is bound to be disallowed.
In this case Percival had his feet on the floor, Tierney made a hash of his catch (and he showed his disappointment, head down, sat on the floor afterwards), the try was scored with only Cummings skwarking on about this new contact rule.
I am not a fan of Phil Clarke but he said that had that try been chalked off he would have stopped watching RL and found another sport. Part of me was thinking was it worth us not getting the try just to see Clarke leave Sky!
Humans are more concerned with having than being.