2017 NRL.com Fantasy Thread Part 59

Fortitude wrote:

Its 100% a beat up. Admittedly yes he nearly knocked slaters face into next week, but Slater fell into making it look worse.

Send off no. Sin bin 100%.

Regardless of falling into a tackle or not, you hit someone in the head, its a penalty, if its remotely late it should be a sin bin.

You see those tackles on players at least once a set. the only difference was slater fell into this one and took a very heavy hit. It seems now days you can hit a player as late as you want, as long as they don't get injured or stay down.

White Lightning wrote:

Shot mate well done. I agree re Taupau but Sione may be worth keeping as a back up unless you don't have T-Trbo which in that case sell Sione & get T-Trbo.

filthridden wrote:

It was on the late side of late. Look at the replay and see how far away Soliola was when the ball was passed. Then see how far away he still was when Felise caught the ball. THEN he starts to raise his arm to hit Slater. The fact that Slater slipped doesn't change the fact that Sia had every intent to hit him very late and it was a reckless act.

Maybe not an automatic send-off but he intent to hit him very late.

Unfortunately the ref couldn't call it a send-off and there's no way (looking back now) he's going to sin-bin someone for that even though he, by law, can do so - that's not the precedent that is set.

He hit the guy in the head through reckless use of a late shot.
I think it SHOULD be a sin-bin offence... but we don't do that. It was never going to be a send-off. I see that now.

If the same happened to a kicker, they would not have been sent off or sin-binned.

However, I think we SHOULD be using the bin for offences like that.

TheWeapon wrote:

Agree, I think it was more unfortunate than anything - standard late hit that happens to everyone nowadays....only difference was Slater was falling and the arm collected his head instead of his rib cage. That said, his head almost ended up a few rows back in the stands. I'm surprised there isn't serious damage.

How many weeks will Soliola get?

Fortitude wrote:

I think saying its unfortunate is a bit kind to Soli, there was intent to hit him hard and late. But I think we both agree that the result dictates the penalty. If slater keeps his feet, its your standard late rib shot on a ball player that every back rower is guilty off (Brown, Thaiday, McGuire, Blair, Gallen Burgess). No penalty.

Bottom line is you cant hit people in the head. Wether they are falling or not.

Soli deserves 2 weeks on the pine, will end up with 3-5 because of the hype. Also, becsue archer has already come out and said he should have been binned, he is royally fucked at the judiciary because the NRL cant be seen contradicting the refs.

Milchcow wrote:There are a few shots of the Soliola tackle that don't actually show the tackle because the camera has moved on with play. it was incredibly late.

Also, whilst a sin bin might feel appropriate, the rules don't actually allow it do they? Its been like this for ages, play like that is send off or nothing.

No Worries wrote:Catching up on the weekend, was the Solioloa hit really as bad as people are making out ? Archer saying it was a send off, Storm crying to the NRL. Is it just because it's the grub Slater ? He was nearly horizontal when he got hit. It wasn't a shoulder charge, it wasn't terribly late and if he hadn't have slipped it would have been a good shot that would have gone unnoticed. Have they said what he's being charged with yet ?

Milchcow wrote:There are a few shots of the Soliola tackle that don't actually show the tackle because the camera has moved on with play. it was incredibly late.

Also, whilst a sin bin might feel appropriate, the rules don't actually allow it do they? Its been like this for ages, play like that is send off or nothing.

Fortitude wrote:

I reckon Nrl should adopt Unions approach. Basically anything that's high is 10 in the bin, regardless of intent or injury or timing.

Stronger on field consequences for sloppy tackles or dangerous intent. Reduce repercussions, i.e weaker sanctions. In this example id be happier seeing Soli in the bin for 10, and on the pine for a week then seeing him play on and get 3-4weeks.

This goes back to the whole argument about Storm getting no advantage from the situation, but the next few teams will get the advantage.

filthridden wrote:

Agree with what you said about union. AFL is the same, no? Not the bin but any contact with the head is a big deal? The onus is on the tackler to not make contact with the head no matter what the situation. It's surprising NRL is behind on this given what happened to McKinnon.

Fortitude wrote:

Union take it heaps far too. Anything around the neck in the ruck and maul. If League played that the storm (and a few other teams) would regularly play with 9 on the field specifically how tacklers try and turn players around on the ground. Hodgson does it a fair bit from memory.

MilfordTheMagician wrote:After starting the byes ranked 141st I've barely moved in 2 months and am now 137th. Got down to 85th two weeks ago but injuries have hurt the last two weeks.

Really hope Smith only misses this week. Two weeks missing I'm almost tempted to trade to Pearce.