Farmduck 2,947 Report post Posted October 19 Is Australia deliberately trying to get all the mistakes out of their system? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Copa 3,392 Report post Posted October 19 Fantastic! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Hallucinating Goose 1,261 Report post Posted October 19 Did they miss the kick from right in front of the posts? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Abicus 251 Report post Posted October 19 Was fun for a bit there Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Hallucinating Goose 1,261 Report post Posted October 19 Oh well....... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Abicus 251 Report post Posted October 19 Just announced that Lebanon played two players under age of 18. IRL elected not to disqualify the win against England. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andyscoot 302 Report post Posted October 19 So Lebanon field ineligible players and it's "no worries"? Not the England deserved to win but that seems bizarre. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MyMrsWouldPreferSinfield 332 Report post Posted October 19 Just now, Abicus said: Just announced that Lebanon played two players under age of 18. IRL elected not to disqualify the win against England. To be fair I would be a little embarrassed going through if they got disqualified! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Man of Kent 4,901 Report post Posted October 19 Just now, Abicus said: Just announced that Lebanon played two players under age of 18. IRL elected not to disqualify the win against England. Good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiH68 500 Report post Posted October 19 Just now, Abicus said: Just announced that Lebanon played two players under age of 18. IRL elected not to disqualify the win against England. I just listened to that. I’m pleased for them but that’s ######. They broke the rules and should be disqualified. To let them carry on as long as they don’t play those two players from now on makes a nonsense of the rules (regardless of whether or not it’s a stupid rule in the first place!) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Hallucinating Goose 1,261 Report post Posted October 19 2 minutes ago, Abicus said: Just announced that Lebanon played two players under age of 18. IRL elected not to disqualify the win against England. That's a joke. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Farmduck 2,947 Report post Posted October 19 I wondered about the Lebanese players when the commentators said some of them were still at school. You have to be 18 to play NRL but I wasn't sure if there was an IRL rule. How would you feel about complaining that "We wuz robbed because they beat us with 17-year-olds." 3 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Copa 3,392 Report post Posted October 19 3 minutes ago, andyscoot said: So Lebanon field ineligible players and it's "no worries"? Not the England deserved to win but that seems bizarre. Lebanon fielding minors should have helped England.. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Copa 3,392 Report post Posted October 19 England looked like they picked big strong women and Australia picked faster athletic women.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Man of Kent 4,901 Report post Posted October 19 Jillaroos are in a different universe to the rest Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Farmduck 2,947 Report post Posted October 19 HT: Jillaroos 23 Lionesses 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pulga 795 Report post Posted October 19 (edited) You can play a test match at 16 and 9 months. That's the rules. Why is 9s different? It's because the IRL is the NRL's lapdog. Edited October 19 by Pulga Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Man of Kent 4,901 Report post Posted October 19 1 minute ago, Copa said: England looked like they picked big strong women and Australia picked faster athletic women.. Don’t think we’ve twigged how to do 9s yet. We’re like a 1970s one-day cricket side compared to the modern day. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pulga 795 Report post Posted October 19 1 minute ago, Farmduck said: HT: Jillaroos 23 Lionesses 0 Is now too early for the "English 9s disaster" thread? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Man of Kent 4,901 Report post Posted October 19 Just now, Pulga said: Is now too early for the "English 9s disaster" thread? Go for it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Farmduck 2,947 Report post Posted October 19 1 minute ago, Man of Kent said: Don’t think we’ve twigged how to do 9s yet. We’re like a 1970s one-day cricket side compared to the modern day. I think that, just like the mens' game, we start off with a much much bigger player pool so your chances of producing A-list players are better. (Among other reasons, of course) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Copa 3,392 Report post Posted October 19 2 minutes ago, Man of Kent said: Don’t think we’ve twigged how to do 9s yet. We’re like a 1970s one-day cricket side compared to the modern day. I hope governing bodies stick with it as it’d be exciting to see how it all evolves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
