Jump to content

Russell Crowe appears to be a bitter man


Recommended Posts

Remember that Russell Crowe has a Book of Feuds, involving South Sydney vs Eastern Suburbs (now the Sydney Roosters).

Here is what Crowe tweeted on the night of the Grand Final:

 
DloTjSiy_bigger.jpg
 
Horseshit result in the

Grand Final . Yet another Rugby League embarrassment. Raiders ripped off. #sixagain

 

Even Canberra coach Ricky Stuart, at his post Grand Final press conference, refused to comment on the refereeing mistake. Stuart stated that the focus for now should be on the fact that the Sydney Roosters had won the Grand Final for a second year in succession. ARL Commission Chairman Peter Beattie reacted by saying that Ricky Stuart was very classy. Obviously Russell Crowe, despite all his wealth and fame, is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I have to say Crowe was saying what almost everyone else on Social Media was saying too. Look at the reactions/replies to the NRL account for example.

Stuart didn't say anything because he'd get banned.

The way that none of the pundits (except Gould slightly till he was cut off) brought it up made it such an elephant in the room. It was 1984esque in how everyone just smiled and pretended nothing controversial happened! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that’s fantastic  . Russell Crowe is passionate and tweeting about rugby league . How many millions will see that . Great stuff . And he’s not wrong .... he’s no axe to grind at all ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watching the NRL grand final highlights again now and the incident were it hits the trainer looks worse the more you see it. I genuinely don’t understand how a team can get a benefit from the ball hitting their trainer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Just watching the NRL grand final highlights again now and the incident were it hits the trainer looks worse the more you see it. I genuinely don’t understand how a team can get a benefit from the ball hitting their trainer. 

Indeed it was.  As a relative neutral watching the Grand Final (I was hoping for a Raiders win but not passionately) the biggest problem with the 'six again' controversy is it has taken the spotlight away from this incident.

The referees made the correct call based on the laws of the game and cannot be attributed any blame but the whole incident made the sport look amateurish... and this is the ultra professional NRL.

But the coaches won't make a big deal of the trainers on this pitch as it is the coaches who actually want the trainers on the pitch.  It is up to the those running the league to get a bit of backbone and ban the practice, or at least enforce the regulations that are in place which are far more restrictive that what actually occurs.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I have to say Crowe was saying what almost everyone else on Social Media was saying too. Look at the reactions/replies to the NRL account for example.

 

I guess if the official stuck with his original view and Canberra scored there may have been more reason to deride him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DavidM said:

One thing I noticed watching the highlights was the brilliant pass from Mitchell that led to the winning try ... and you could compare that with Leilua bombing a try

true enough

see you later undertaker - in a while necrophile 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, super major said:

I guess if the official stuck with his original view and Canberra scored there may have been more reason to deride him?

Canberra would have still had to score though and they'd been on their line for a while and not really come close.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DavidM said:

One thing I noticed watching the highlights was the brilliant pass from Mitchell that led to the winning try ... and you could compare that with Leilua bombing a try

Mitchell gets stick for his involvement in games sometimes but I think it is because he is so bloody good that we expect him to do these types of things every time he touches the ball.

If I had to say who is the single most dangerous opposition player to play against in the modern game it is Mitchell... even more so than the likes of Tedesco and Tuivasa-Sheck who are consistently great but even they are not as mercurial as Mitchell. 

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has already been mentioned... the issue was not the decision by the ref - he had no choice when it happened. It's having "trainers" on the field unnecessarily.

Its now beyond a joke how long the trainer or "water-boy" or  tie carrier is on the pitch. I still remember NZ few years ago and the trainer/water boy was clearly directing play for long periods... a bit like Briers for Warrington use to do but not as blatant as NZ did then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Mitchell gets stick for his involvement in games sometimes but I think it is because he is so bloody good that we expect him to do these types of things every time he touches the ball.

If I had to say who is the single most dangerous opposition player to play against in the modern game it is Mitchell... even more so than the likes of Tedesco and Tuivasa-Sheck who are consistently great but even they are not as mercurial as Mitchell. 

I disagree. Tedesco and Tuivasa-Sheck are consistently dangerous. But Mitchell is inconsistently dangerous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Manfred Mann said:

I disagree. Tedesco and Tuivasa-Sheck are consistently dangerous. But Mitchell is inconsistently dangerous.

I’d agree actually . Mitchell to me can be quite frustrating as he can drift out of games or not be as effective as he should be . RTS and Teddy are always a big threat - magnified by the position they play meaning they’re always in the game . At times literally and effectively LM is on the fringes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Manfred Mann said:

I disagree. Tedesco and Tuivasa-Sheck are consistently dangerous. But Mitchell is inconsistently dangerous.

Why are you saying you disagree.  That's pretty much exactly what I said.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the refs had stopped the game for a few seconds and explained the decision and why the call had changed. No one would be too bothered about it.

CANBERRA would have been more ready for the handover then and the call was actually correct in the end anyway so they can't really argue.

Letting the game flow on so quickly after a huge misscommunication was the big error.

Rusty is alright by me

england_identity2.jpg1921_button.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.