2017 Brisbane Broncos Thread - we hate them for their freedom

Dip wrote:Moga went in to make the tackle on the guy who picked up the ball then pulled out when the whistle was blown. There was every chance he wraps up the ball and player and the play stops there. It was no given the try was scored.

They pick the ball up and start running then they blow the whistle dont they?

Either way, they shouldnt have stopped it. I expect them to blow the whistle now every single time it looks like someone gets hurt.

Edit: just watched it again. Moga is attempting to wrap him up. No its 100% not a try but far out its highly likely they would have scored IMO.

Fox sports tells me that there is a rule that if the ref suspects a serious head injury (coz refs are doctors) then he has the ability to stop play at his discretion. If thats true.. then ok.. but you would still expect them to stop play every time there is a head knock now. Refs should have a black and white rule for that stuff, they have too much discretion as is.

The sound when Oates hit Milford is nothing like I've heard before on the field, so I'm not surprised they blew the whistle straight away. On another note, plenty of great sportsmanship by both teams. None of the Panthers during the game or afterwards cracked up when play was stopped, and clapped him off. Langer was the first to check on May and stay with him, and Mansour helping Thaiday. Great to see heaps of respect there from everyone even in such a high stakes match.

i find the calls for play-on a bit disgusting to be honest, if he's just slow to get up, or he's rolling on the floor grabbing at something then fair enough, let them go, but the sound of the collision was like nothing else, Oates goes limp before he hits the ground and when he does, he doesn't move, at that point, the ref has a duty of care that goes beyond the outcome of a game of footy and i want him to blow time-off immediately 100 times out of 100.

What happens if the ref allows that play to continue, and one of the Panthers players goes to run downfield in support, tries to jump over him and collects him Tonie-Carroll-Style? Is everyone praising his decision to let the Panthers play advantage then?

Ice wrote:Solid win, positions them perfectly for the Storm next week when all and sundry write them off cause of a few injuries and a close win.

I'll be on the Broncos.

Sounds like you'll be on ice more like it.

Oh wait..

surmo13 wrote:i find the calls for play-on a bit disgusting to be honest, if he's just slow to get up, or he's rolling on the floor grabbing at something then fair enough, let them go, but the sound of the collision was like nothing else, Oates goes limp before he hits the ground and when he does, he doesn't move, at that point, the ref has a duty of care that goes beyond the outcome of a game of footy and i want him to blow time-off immediately 100 times out of 100.

What happens if the ref allows that play to continue, and one of the Panthers players goes to run downfield in support, tries to jump over him and collects him Tonie-Carroll-Style? Is everyone praising his decision to let the Panthers play advantage then?

Its not the decision that I, and others, are annoyed about. Its that there is no consistency with the decisions.

Stop play for all apparent/suspected head knocks if thats how they want to do it, or stop for none. Dont fucking pick and choose when to do it and when not to do it.

I mean how often do you see a defender get his head in the wrong spot then cop a knock, then they stumble around in back play etc or he lays there until a trainer comes on then after a handful of plays then time is called off. How often do you see a head clash and the 2 guys are behind the play while it continues. Did they stop play when Thaiday copped his knock?? I dont remember. Whats the difference b/w situations like that and the Oates one?

I mean fuck, he knocked himself out because for some reason he chose to sprint at Milford instead of the hole. It wasnt even part of a tackle. He wasnt in the way of the play, so it should have been play on.

Pieman wrote:Stop talking it down lol they will get Boyd and TPJ back next week. All the blokes who copped knocks might be fine too.

Was a really entertaining game, was BS when they called a stop to play after the Oates knock out/knock on. They literally stopped Penrith scoring a try by doing that. Sets a huge precedent if we stop the game as soon as it looks like someone is injured now.

Bronco defence was epic at times, really played for each other, was great to watch.

I think moylan at FB really changes that game. Edwards is an energetic runner but far out he has zero attacking nouse in him. Moylan prob finishes off a few of those out the back plays if he is there.

Far out RCG had a game, he was unreal last night and has been for some time now. Would love to see him in the Australian side at the end of the year. He is gun.

The rules were changed from this to it's current state after the 1969 grand final.

I understand your point Pieman, and applaud your commitment to the subject, even it does make you look like a bit of a d*ck.

dasherhalo wrote:I understand your point Pieman, and applaud your commitment to the subject, even it does make you look like a bit of a d*ck.

Thanks I think haha.

Why does it make me look like a bit of a dick Dessy?

All I want is some consistency. The referees have enough influence on games as is it, they arent doctors, why are they picking and choosing when to stop the games when there might be a head knock?

Are the games only stopped when the player with the ball gets a head knock? Or does it stop for defenders too? Is it after 1 or 2 plays? Is it immediate? What is the difference between the Wallace Falcon and the Oates self inflicted head knock? Why didnt the game stop for Wallace's suspected injury? Did it stop for Thaiday's head knock? Is it only stopped when the player goes down? Or does it stop when the player gets back up and stumbles around?

Like I said, Its not the call that I and others are upset with, its the inconsistency. If they stop for all head knocks, then good. Do it. Happy to delay a game a little bit if it helps with the players health. Dont let the refs pick and choose is all I am saying.

they're not stopping the game for any old injury, they stop the game because there is a fucking human being on the ground that took a shoulder to the face and isn't fucking moving and may or may not be in a life-threatening situation that will not be helped by a play continuing around the immediate area where he is layed out, I have never seen advantage called when a ball carrier gets knocked out cold.

I didnt say any other injury. I specifically said head knocks.

So it only gets stopped if the guy is unconscious? Why cant they come on and treat him while the play continues? The ball was well and truley away from him within like a second.

Why only ball carriers? Why not defenders? Same thing happened with Thiaday, he was laying on his back not moving. Did the play stop immediately? Did the play stop when Wallace copped the ball to the head for his falcon?

Why is it on the refs shoulders to deep what is more serious than another incident??

Set some rules for it, dont leave it up to the discretion of the ref. If someone is unconscious on the field - or appears to have copped a head knock regardless of whether they have the ball or not and regardless of where they are on the field, call play off immediately every single time.

All I want is consistency with it.

Im only talking about ball carriers in specific because defenders being knocked out wouldn't result in a loss of possession in which this scenario is being discussed, but i'm not limiting myself, whenever a player has been knocked out, not moving, play needs to be stopped, no if, but or maybes.

the ball ended up next to him, the whistle was blown as Katoa picked up the ball and went to step over Oates lifeless body to sprint away, with a Broncos player in the area to attempt a tackle and Panthers players on the other side of Oates that could obstruct medical staff chasing the play downfield, he was in the play area.

if you can't differentiate between a player being knocked a bit wobbly where a trainer can just escort them off the side of the field for a HIA and a player losing conciousness, not moving on the ground where extra seconds could end with serious consequences, i don't know what else to tell you.

Matt Lodge will need to have a big pre-season if he wants a shot at first grade next year. Still carrying too much weight IMO.

surmo13 wrote:Im only talking about ball carriers in specific because defenders being knocked out wouldn't result in a loss of possession in which this scenario is being discussed, but i'm not limiting myself, whenever a player has been knocked out, not moving, play needs to be stopped, no if, but or maybes.

the ball ended up next to him, the whistle was blown as Katoa picked up the ball and went to step over Oates lifeless body to sprint away, with a Broncos player in the area to attempt a tackle and Panthers players on the other side of Oates that could obstruct medical staff chasing the play downfield, he was in the play area.

if you can't differentiate between a player being knocked a bit wobbly where a trainer can just escort them off the side of the field for a HIA and a player losing conciousness, not moving on the ground where extra seconds could end with serious consequences, i don't know what else to tell you.

Your first sentence illustrates my point well.

Who cares about the loss of possession its its a player welfare issue. Its totally irrelevant. If a player gets knocked out or appears to cop a bad head knock, either always stop the game or never stop the game. If they have the ball or not, its 100% irrelevant because all of a sudden its about welfare, its not about ball possession. If a guy gets knocked out or dazed, like thiaday did when tackling, they are in just as much danger as someone who has the ball.

The ball is about 10m away from oates after 3 seconds. After 2 seconds, they are already past Oates. Thats not in the play. What does stopping the play actually do? How does it increase the speed as to which a player can be seen my medical staff? He was in zero danger laying on the ground. Why cant the game play on while he be being treated - and then stop it when the ball is closer or after he has been assessed by medical staff. They prob obstructed the medical staff more by standing around him. There was no reason to stop the play when the ref - except for he thought he saw a nasty hit and he freaked out. He could 100% have been assessed by the staff with the game playing on.

No one knew what was going to happen, what if he rolled over and tried to get up? Also, Who are you to say that a hit where someone stays down is worse than someone who gets a hit and tries to get back up. You can get a concussion without getting knocked out. Just like, you can get knocked out without having a concussion. I would prefer to see the game stopped for all head knocks resulting in a player staying down, or stumbling around etc. Not, "Oh, its just a little head knock - play on", coming from the ref who may or may not have seen it and even if they did - they dont know what they are looking at.

Yeah, its unfortunate, was a hard hit and I dont want to see shit like that, but fuck me, show some consistency with a rule for it. All I want is consistency with it.

Lodge will 100% be playing FG for the bronco's next year moose. He is a good player, just has been a germ of a human.

so if refs allowed play on after some-one gets clearly ko'd loses the ball, an opposing player picks it up and get's tackled to where both players fall on top of the unconcious player, that'd be fine with you?

The only reason the play progressed that far downfield is because the Panthers player didn't hear the first whistle, which occurred when the ball was still in the immediate area of the player and fucking anything could've happened.

i'm not saying the hit is worse, i'm saying there's no danger of a concious player swallowing their own tongue, there's no danger of a concious player choking on their own vomit or saliva, there's no danger of a concious player not breathing, theres no danger of a concious player's heart not beating.

The whole point of calling time-off is to stop everything and ensure theres a clear path for medical professionals to get to the player unobstructed and clear the area so medicabs can get to them unobstructed, because the play cleared the area this time doesn't mean that would always be the case, and the ref had no way of knowing for sure it would clear the area back when he blew the whistle, which i will remind you again, was blown when Katoa had entered the immediate area of Oates and grabbed the ball, not when Whare was streaking down the sideline after Moga had stopped playing.

surmo13 wrote:so if refs allowed play on after some-one gets clearly ko'd loses the ball, an opposing player picks it up and get's tackled to where both players fall on top of the unconcious player, that'd be fine with you?

The only reason the play progressed that far downfield is because the Panthers player didn't hear the first whistle, which occurred when the ball was still in the immediate area of the player and fucking anything could've happened.

i'm not saying the hit is worse, i'm saying there's no danger of a concious player swallowing their own tongue, there's no danger of a concious player choking on their own vomit or saliva, there's no danger of a concious player not breathing, theres no danger of a concious player's heart not beating.

The whole point of calling time-off is to stop everything and ensure theres a clear path for medical professionals to get to the player unobstructed and clear the area so medicabs can get to them unobstructed, because the play cleared the area this time doesn't mean that would always be the case, and the ref had no way of knowing for sure it would clear the area back when he blew the whistle, which i will remind you again, was blown when Katoa had entered the immediate area of Oates and grabbed the ball, not when Whare was streaking down the sideline after Moga had stopped playing.

If that happened, it would be unfortunate but would be part of the game. Just like someone getting KO'd, unfortunate but part of the game. Personally, Ive never seen it happen yet (your scenario). Seen lots of blokes get KO'd and the game play on tho only for the trainer to get there quick smart then the play stops when its appropriate. Not mid play.

The whistle is blown after katoa jumps over him. The are past him, play on.

I am not saying DONT TREAT A PLAYER - I am saying that there was no need to for game to be stopped in that instance at that time, they blew the whistle after katoa jumps over him. Alfie was there within a few seconds, then the (I assume) medical staff rocked up. Stopping the game had zero effect on that. Stop it at the next tackle, stop it after the next play. Dont stop the fucking game mid play because "OMG I think that looked nasty".

And, again, I am saying - have a rule where if there is a head knock, stop the play. Always. Not "Im the ref and its at my discretion as to when I will do it".

You cant eg swallow your tongue when you are face down like that or choke on your own spew in the 5 seconds it takes for a trainer to get there. Thiaday was actually in a more dangerous position after he got KO'd because he was on his back, and again, the game didnt stop then did it? Why are you not blowing up about that?

And yeah he didnt know what was going to happen. Imagine if Oates rolls over and gets up a few seconds later? Who knows what was going to happen. Thats why play shouldnt have been stopped immediately.

Just because a guy is KO it does not mean he is automatically in a worse situation. Eg, "There is no chance that an unconscious guy has a fracture in his temple and goes in to make the next tackle", etc etc etc. One is not worse than the other.

Pieman wrote:If that happened, it would be unfortunate but would be part of the game. Just like someone getting KO'd, unfortunate but part of the game.

didn't read past there, because that was all i needed to hear to know that, once again, i'm done trying to discuss with you.

Safety is fucking paramount in all parts of life, a head clash is an unfornate accident that's part of the game, further endangering an unconscious player for the sake of a game of footy is the definition of negligence and you are FUCKING DISGUSTING for trying to justify it.

congrats though, in a forum with a history of posters trying to out-insult each other, you managed to write one of the most offensive things i've ever seen on sportal/nrlff by doing something completely different.

"oh sorry medical staff, this man could possibly be dying, but we refs need to be commited to seeing if a football team scores some points in a game before we can ensure you the best possible chance to treat him, if other players get in your way chasing after a football, or 150+kg lands on top of him because it was a try-saving tackle at any point while your trying to do your job *shrugs* them's the breaks"

un-fucking-beleivable, delete your account.

surmo13 wrote:

didn't read past there, because that was all i needed to hear to know that, once again, i'm done trying to discuss with you.

Safety is fucking paramount in all parts of life, a head clash is an unfornate accident that's part of the game, further endangering an unconscious player for the sake of a game of footy is the definition of negligence and you are FUCKING DISGUSTING for trying to justify it.

congrats though, in a forum with a history of posters trying to out-insult each other, you managed to write one of the most offensive things i've ever seen on sportal/nrlff by doing something completely different.

"oh sorry medical staff, this man could possibly be dying, but we refs need to be commited to seeing if a football team scores some points in a game before we can ensure you the best possible chance to treat him, if other players get in your way chasing after a football, or 150+kg lands on top of him because it was a try-saving tackle at any point while your trying to do your job *shrugs* them's the breaks"

un-fucking-beleivable, delete your account.

You shouldnt be surprised about his poor form - this is the guy who defends Fergo aswell.

Pieman wrote:Thanks I think haha.

Why does it make me look like a bit of a dick Dessy?

Must remember to bump the sarcasm level up from "obvious" to "oncoming train" next time.

Now, I say this with all due respect: I understand that it's my team, and my player, but you're banging a drum about subject that had 6 pissed blokes silenced - try that one sometime. Everyone was pretty damn worried, but it was immediately apparent to everyone, particularly after the first replay, that Oates was in trouble. it was sickening.

Now, I know you've said repeatedly that you agree with the decision, but you're using that position to launch a barrage of reasons why time off shouldn't have been blown.

Congrats to the ref. He used his discretion in a way very few people could argue with, and frankly, anyone who disagrees is, in my book, a bit of a d*ck.



And.... who the fuck is Dessy???

dasherhalo wrote:

Must remember to bump the sarcasm level up from "obvious" to "oncoming train" next time.

Now, I say this with all due respect: I understand that it's my team, and my player, but you're banging a drum about subject that had 6 pissed blokes silenced - try that one sometime. Everyone was pretty damn worried, but it was immediately apparent to everyone, particularly after the first replay, that Oates was in trouble. it was sickening.

Now, I know you've said repeatedly that you agree with the decision, but you're using that position to launch a barrage of reasons why time off shouldn't have been blown.

Congrats to the ref. He used his discretion in a way very few people could argue with, and frankly, anyone who disagrees is, in my book, a bit of a d*ck.



And.... who the fuck is Dessy???

I was joking....

There were also a number of players who played on, as you should, to the whistle. There are also a lot of people including commentators and sports writers, who think it should have been play on - or stopped at the next tackle.

I dont agree with the decision in that instance, I agree that the game should have been stopped but not immediately like that. Which is what normally happens.

Again, also as I have said numerous times - I just want consistency with the rule. It shouldnt be up to the referee to determine that one hit is more severe than another and therefore the game needs to be immediately stopped and another hit doesnt get that. Make it all head knocks have an immediate stop on the game.

And you, you are. I meant to say Dassy.

dasherhalo wrote:


And.... who the fuck is Dessy???

When I see your name I always think of Des Hasler too. It was only a couple of weeks ago I actually realised it's nothing like DesHaslerHero