_G-Dog_
Kennel Legend
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2006
- Messages
- 13,347
- Reaction score
- 7,796
salary cap still tight for next 2 years?!?.. Lol what a joke..
salary cap still tight for next 2 years?!?.. Lol what a joke..
So everything that is good that is happening with the dogs will be Gould and everything bad that happens will be Barrett is this right ?
Yeah, I think most people on here are just meme'ing that up at the moment, but no doubt some of more hardcore #SackBarrett-ers truly believe itSo true lol
So it will be very interesting after "22 when Vaughan and Dufty come off contract and wanting an upgrade if we want to keep them.salary cap still tight for next 2 years?!?.. Lol what a joke..
2024. Year of the dog
Hey, I've got a great idea - why don't we give them a low wage in 2023 & back end the rest? What could possibly go wrong?So it will be very interesting after "22 when Vaughan and Dufty come off contract and wanting an upgrade if we want to keep them.
Covid will kill us by then2024. Year of the dog
Could this be because we have already signed someone else for 22 but can’t announce until after season over?
Could be because Gus just talks shit in general. Elliott could get sacked, a few other players moved on and Gus will just claim "things change in rugby league" lol.Could this be because we have already signed someone else for 22 but can’t announce until after season over?
8 times I believe Gus.
Well there were two 'incidents' alone just in yesterdays game.8 times I believe Gus.
Always a Bulldog
Annesley had the farkin hide to say in his week's "Excuses for the Referees" briefing that the referee didn't make a mistake by placing a player on report for an accidental hair pull that according to the MRP should not have been reported.Well there were two 'incidents' alone just in yesterdays game.
This is why Annesley has to go, as discussed in another thread, he was clear about it being fine when Munster first pulled the "on report = free interchange" stunt, which goes entirely against the spirit of that law. Given he went that way at the time, he now is stuck defending the indefensible.Annesley had the farkin hide to say in his week's "Excuses for the Referees" briefing that the referee didn't make a mistake by placing a player on report for an accidental hair pull that according to the MRP should not have been reported.
FMD Annesley, you plainly don't understand the implications of a penalty being awarded, which the MRP found was sufficient, and placing a player on report, which the MRP found was not necessary. For a starter it gives the opposition a free replacement, that they then gain a further advantage from by exploiting the hell out of it in a way that it was not intended to be exploited. Secondly it gives the ref an excuse to pick on the player constantly for the rest of the game and remind them they they are already on report. Annesley needs to think about the implications of the error, not just the error itself.
I'm not even going to bother with the TT no try bullshit, a great example of finding a way, some way, any way, to excuse an obvious inconsistency when compared to other frequent rulings. Like the Bunker is a mind reader knowing what TT was thinking at the time, ridiculous.
Always a Bulldog
I didn't see it. What was the justification for the turbo try?Annesley had the farkin hide to say in his week's "Excuses for the Referees" briefing that the referee didn't make a mistake by placing a player on report for an accidental hair pull that according to the MRP should not have been reported.
FMD Annesley, you plainly don't understand the implications of a penalty being awarded, which the MRP found was sufficient, and placing a player on report, which the MRP found was not necessary. For a starter it gives the opposition a free replacement, that they then gain a further advantage from by exploiting the hell out of it in a way that it was not intended to be exploited. Secondly it gives the ref an excuse to pick on the player constantly for the rest of the game and remind them they they are already on report. Annesley needs to think about the implications of the error, not just the error itself.
I'm not even going to bother with the TT no try bullshit, a great example of finding a way, some way, any way, to excuse an obvious inconsistency when compared to other frequent rulings. Like the Bunker is a mind reader knowing what TT was thinking at the time, ridiculous.
Always a Bulldog
Apparently the bunker somehow magically knew that TT was deliberately transferring the ball from his right hand to his left hand by rolling it down his torso with his fingers. Of course he didn't lose control, he did it deliberately, it was always in his control, one finger at a time.I didn't see it. What was the justification for the turbo try?
Anyone filling Gus defending Latrell on twitter? My god it's laughable. "Latrell was confused when Manu approached him" wtf