shane_sharks
OzCardTrader
18th man should be available for such instances
Hell yeah it does, I'm not having a cry about it, nor was I on Sunday. The fact that I support the team is irrelevant in this instance. I'm posing it as a question in response to the thread discussion about players serving bans the length of their victims. I'm interested in what others think about the issue within the NRLs rules; should it keep happening to teams in the future?
Just put it on the back of the envelope, that way if it gets lost it wil come back to you LOL. Good Luck.
i have always believed that the player responsible for injuring another player due to foul play and the injured player has 3 weeks off for the injury, the responsible player should have, AT MINIMUM, the same amount of time out of the game...
This is the answer IMO18th man should be available for such instances
Nope can't do it.
Scenario: Jonathan Thurston illegally tackles James Hasson (Supercoach gun) in Rnd 24, Toovey knows he's playing the Cowboys Week1 of the Semi's do you think Hasson would be back before that game?
Cheers
Ross
Why do you need an 18th man when you have 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th man on bench?
The 18th man is a safe measure for a team victimised by an illigal tackle that takes a player out of the whole game
I agree..... I ilke the 18th man idea But it wouldn't surprise me if teams had players go down with concussion late in games to bring on a fresh player.
I agree..... I ilke the 18th man idea But it wouldn't surprise me if teams had players go down with concussion late in games to bring on a fresh player.
I wouldn't mind seeing 'real' scrums. Not the RU style but at least not a lean in.
Also, the NRL needs to challenge clubs to get out of this mindset of dull footy. There are so many rules to exploit, but a generation of coaches like Sheens, Smith, Bennett and Gould wanted low-percentage plays, minimal errors and to coached a lot of the 'instinct' and had rule change put in to suck the life out of the game. If something was in the game that made it exciting and against the grain, you can be sure they found a way to nullify it or have it nullified in a negative way. And Sheens, Smith and Bennett have begat us the next generation of coaches who are too scared to allow flair to rule because if they lose in an exciting way, it's their head on the chopping block.
I'm sorry I'm on a soap box but it really annoys me that tweaks aren't made to better the game, to make it positive. Hell, I can distinctly remember the last time a deep set, long sweeping back line was used and it was Penrith a couple of years ago and they scored because the defence had NFI how to defend against depth and bodies in motion.
Come on NRL! Excite us again and feck off the wrestle and 5 up and kick.
Tony Williams will be playing, 5/8 2nd row and wing. Might earn his paycheck that way.John Morris retires nd Mitch brown to sharks
Who are the dogs having for backs next year lossing him nd inu
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?