VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Tue, October 03 2006, 19:01:06 GMT-10
Author: MKT
Subject: Re: Paul Simpkins
In reply to: Daniel 's message, "Paul Simpkins" on Tue, October 03 2006, 14:24:38 GMT-10

>Just wondering what everyone thinks of Pauls
>performance in the Grand Final???

I thought it was a touch ordinary, I think he got a fairly good play the ball and tempo going but some other decisions, weren't up to the standard that got him to the GF in the first place. While some of it is perhaps interpretive. Being a Brisbane fan, objectively I thought Melbourne did not get the 'rub of the green' in this game how that effected the result is moot really.

Berrigan had or was in the process of losing control of the football in the stripping call. I think a loose carry call would have been called if Slater had not taken possession but merely allowed Berrigan to merely lose the football.

The obstruction call was also cut and dried and the head high tackle was fallen into at speed and in vicinity of the goal line....possibly a moot point. (Did Simpkins even make that call or was he tipped off?).

The video refereeing decision I have less of a problem with, the King no-try, was probably technically a try if you go to the absolute slow mo...but in my opinion Hoffman is the player responsible for the ball propelling towards the Bronco goal line (Hoffmans attempt to catch the football is ineffective and only moves Hodges arms to contact the ball prior to his intention, (Hoffman has forced the ball loose unfairly but accidentally)....

Yes I'm being a rebel who thinks the rules could change regarding events relating to kicks in play LOL.

I think high end rugby league games (as entertainment) are suffering from the interchange system however...(State of Origin, NRL Finals), the players are absolutely fatiguing themselves in the brutal physical contact and frenetic pace that occurs in the first minutes of the game. This leads to many phases in the play where teams are just simply taking a mutual time out (subsequently a lull occurs) from the marathon that started as a sprint. That's why when fresh legs come on the field you tend to notice these players as the others are quite simply 'gone'.

Another point, this game brought about more decoy plays than any other this season, and yet again players in attack were loitering in the defensive line....I don't have a real problem with it as it's more exciting to watch but, obstruction is becoming a very subtle thing in the better teams..:)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

  • Re: Paul Simpkins -- Gregory Pfeiffer, Wed, October 04 2006, 12:01:36 GMT-10
    [ Contact Forum Admin ]

    Forum timezone: GMT+10
    VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
    Before posting please read our privacy policy.
    VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
    Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.