Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 32 of 32

Thread: Phil Bentham....an apology

  1. #26
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    458
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reacher View Post
    Just had an interesting conversation with a professional coach though. He agrees that the try should have been given but also by the letter of the law, Percival's try could have been disallowed. Apparently the receiving team (in this case Tierney) once he has jumped for the ball, shouldn't be touched. Bentham went around all the clubs pre-season to explain this. That's why Cummings said what he did because he was being a pedant and following the rules to the letter. No one agrees with it, just pointing out some context.
    That is quite an interesting point - if these were the words used Receiving rather than Defending - then surely the receiver is the player who the ball is kicked for, so nobody should be able to touch your own teams player when you kick for them.

  2. #27
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    The Heath
    Posts
    257
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    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!!!!!!!!!

  3. #28
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    417
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by undertheradar View Post
    If that's the case, its virtually impossible for the attacking team to compete for the ball whilst it's in the air. 2 players jumping for a ball, it's almost certain there'll be contact


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Absolutely spot on. The attacker can't just disappear can he? Percival continuously looked at the ball. What else could he have done?

  4. #29
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Buddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    11,407
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reacher View Post
    The other point is that we as fans don't know the rules fully. Bar Walmsley, most of our forwards and outside backs drop to the ground on contact looking for a quick play the ball. It's practically a surrender type of tackle. They are coached to do that. Because of that the ref goes through his calls of "move" "stand" etc and it basically gives the defending team much longer to hold down and slow the ruck down. They can't do that when someone tries to make metres after contact because they have to wrestle said player to the floor. It's hard to explain on here and I'm not articulating myself well but Wigan are very clever with it. They know this and they utilise it time and again against us.

    James Childs would have caned Wigan last night but every referee is different. Wigan knew what they could get away with last night.
    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.

  5. #30
    Got A Replica Shirt
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    67
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by markrvr View Post
    Correct and it's this type of coaching which has ruined Richards. It's called a dominant tackle I believe and the refs give you more time to get off the player.
    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.

  6. #31
    Got A Replica Shirt St Christopher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    54
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by undertheradar View Post
    If that's the case, its virtually impossible for the attacking team to compete for the ball whilst it's in the air. 2 players jumping for a ball, it's almost certain there'll be contact


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    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.

  7. #32
    In The South Stand 49er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    4,224
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •