NRL Fantasy Fanatics - A place for discussion of NRL Fantasy / Virtual Sports / Super Coach and other Fantasy Sports
Pieman wrote:
this bit made me chuckle
Dip wrote:
Tell me where I'm wrong. I disagreed with picking Niko ahead of Hunt, but it's factually correct. There is no doubt this year Hunt has been one of the form players in the comp and Bird has only had one good game, but you don't judge recruitment after a few weeks. I remember Phil Gould doing this big narrative on Milford not being a 5/8 a month into 2015. From then he was probably the form 5/8 in the comp for the rest of the season.
Whinges about trolling in a troll post?surmo13 wrote:It has never stopped being weird to me that the posters most interested in trolling this thread mostly come from the Knights, Tigers & Eels, then again maybe that isn't so weird, i imagine if my team spent the majority of recent history locked in battles for wooden spoons, i'd want to find something to take my mind off it too...
Dip wrote:
Tell me where I'm wrong. I disagreed with picking Niko ahead of Hunt, but it's factually correct. There is no doubt this year Hunt has been one of the form players in the comp and Bird has only had one good game, but you don't judge recruitment after a few weeks. I remember Phil Gould doing this big narrative on Milford not being a 5/8 a month into 2015. From then he was probably the form 5/8 in the comp for the rest of the season.
Krump wrote:
Whinges about trolling in a troll post?
I don't think who they support is relevant, they just happen to be more interested in footy than fantasy on a fantasy based forum. This thread seems to morph into all sorts of non bronco based discussion because it's the busiest, kind of a self fulfilling prophecy.
no whinging here, they can do what they want, and i could never stop them if i wanted to, a Bronco fan with thin skin would never survive a rugby league forum, it's just really odd to me is all, i would think the type of fans to carry on in here would be those that have had some sort of success rubbing it in, but instead it's fans of clubs that have had a far worse run than us, its feels kinda like those scenes in tv/movies where there's a midget trying to punch on with a regular-sized person, but they've got their arm pushing away on the midgets head, so it's just a bunch of air-swingssurmo13 wrote:
surmo13 wrote:
Honeysett wrote:
Well we're all very similar none of this teams has won a premiership in longer than a decade.
Ice wrote:Re the Slater try, I'm not sure what everyone is arguing here, but I honestly don't get the fuss. The rules are clear as day.
He deliberately "released" the ball with the intention to kick it. He didn't fumble or spill it. That it touched the ground first is totally irrelevant, even if his intent was to kick it on the full, hence his uncertainty, he kicked it, ergo a try every day of the week.
Move along people, nothing more to see here...
Pieman wrote:would anyone dispute it if it was ruled a knock on?
I dont think so.
He kicked it pretty much immediately IMO. Immediately might actually mean any time before the second bounce in this situation.
Turns out it was the right call, IMO i think it happens a little bit but goes unnoticed on grubbers anyway
I think the drop kick call was right, even though it didn't feel right. I agree the intent was all anyone focused on, but even your focus on immediate still gets it across the line. What is immediate ? The slow mo makes it look bad, but in real time it's that "feel" like you mentioned. There is a split second in it. May be 1/2 a second between the ball hitting the ground then the foot. That has to be considered immediate. It's just that with a drop kick attempt at field goal, you want that contact to be simultaneous for better accuracy and control. That's why it feels off because we are use to a drop kick being simultaneous not immediate.Oz Sport Mad wrote:
Yeah, nah I think it was pretty clearly a dud call given the rule was probably written to allow drop kicks without them being judged knock on's.
Unfortunately everyone incorrectly focused on the intention side of it (probably thanks to the commentators) rather than the fact he wasn't able to get his boot to the ball (admittedly it wasn't as obvious as if he was tackled mid kick etc.).
Moving on, it's been hard to get a read on how we are travelling but it will be a big test tonight.
I think we were unlucky against the Storm and their effort last night verifies that form line but the Bunnies have been really good this year IMO on the back of their forwards dominating.
A win and I'll be confident about the year ahead.
A loss and I will still be unsure about where we are at given the inconsistency.
No Worries wrote:
I think the drop kick call was right, even though it didn't feel right. I agree the intent was all anyone focused on, but even your focus on immediate still gets it across the line. What is immediate ? The slow mo makes it look bad, but in real time it's that "feel" like you mentioned. There is a split second in it. May be 1/2 a second between the ball hitting the ground then the foot. That has to be considered immediate. It's just that with a drop kick attempt at field goal, you want that contact to be simultaneous for better accuracy and control. That's why it feels off because we are use to a drop kick being simultaneous not immediate.
As for tonight you better win, the odds were to juicy to pass up and there in my multi
Oz Sport Mad wrote:
I never include the Broncos in my multi's as I've cost myself a few times due to being arguably a fraction biased.....you've probably never noticed.
Anyway, $2.50 does appear to be overs but favourites are favourites for a reason and regardless of odds we probably do deserve to be underdogs tonight.
Bit harsh on Dip.
Home