Jump to content

Wed 24th Aug: SL: Leeds Rhinos v Huddersfield Giants KO 8pm (Sky)


daz39
 Share

Who will win?  

8 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Leeds Rhinos
      3
    • Huddersfield Giants
      5

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 24/08/22 at 19:30

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

Thats what I meant, retrospective punishments given how difficult it would be to make a decision during games. Where a player stays down holding their head to win a penalty and the disciplinary panel after review can see no head contact, then that player should receive a ban 

I agree in principle.  I suspect there will be very few instances where there is no head contact... they stay down because there was contact felt that either 1) the ref saw but didn't think it merited action or 2) he missed it.

At least not giving penalties live will stop people staying down to win them when they could have got up to play the ball.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites


22 minutes ago, Niels said:

You have put this perfectly.

As a neutral I felt I had watched a terrific game only to have it spoiled by a terrible game changing decision at the end. 

I also thought the over celebrating was distasteful, especially after Fages injury. 

 

 

so are you saying take away the emotion of celebrating a dramatic win.

Are you expecting players in the moment of a dramatic win to think "oh... hang on should we show our enjoyment at winning or will it be distasteful for whatever reason...

The Leeds players will have believed the game changing decision was a justified penalty at that moment it was given. 

I may be biased although a saints fan but I thought it was a penalty and Myler didn't cheat. I think the sinbinning resulting from the penalty was a harsh decision for sure.

I actually thought the bigger cheating incident was the very very late tackle on Myler early in the game... which to my mind was clearly intended to hurt the kicker... the fact that was Hill too is besides the point of course and he should have been sinbinned or sent off then and who knows Leeds may of scored more try's during what should have been at least a sin bin and a game changing non decision.

 

 

Edited by redjonn
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, redjonn said:

so are you saying take away the emotion of celebrating a dramatic win.

Are you expecting players in the moment of a dramatic win to think "oh... hang on should we show are enjoyment at winning or will it be distasteful for whatever reason...

The Leeds players will have believed the game changing decision was a justified penalty at that moment it was given. 

I may be biased although a saints fan but I thought it was a penalty and Myler didn't cheat. I think the sinbinning resulting from the penalty was a harsh decision for sure.

I actually thought the bigger cheating incident was the very very late tackle on Myler early in the game... which to my mind was clearly intended to hurt the kicker... the fact that was Hill too is besides the point of course and he should have been sinbinned then and who knows Leeds may of scored more try's during what should have been a sin bin and a game changing non decision.

 

 

Thanks, I appreciate your point.

Yes, it was the sinbinning that was very harsh. I think at that stage of the game referees have to be 100% sure before making a potentially game changing decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, redjonn said:

Hill should get banned for his very late hit on Myler earlier in the game that the ref missed. He may get more because he lifted Myler in a prone position just like if you lift a injured player.

 The ‘earlier in the game’ incident saw Hill collide with Myler after the Leeds player’s kick. He ran at Myler with his arms apart, nothing late about his movements, but Myler played for a penalty by pretending injury. 
 

The second half incident was Myler cheating again, he lifted himself; having said that, Hill should have released him earlier. 
 

I have seen Myler do these little things before, but then again, which player hasn’t?

I dislike the ‘dominant’ and ‘surrender’ calls by a referee. If the ball carrying player is tackled, then he is tackled, without another defender being allowed to fall top. Whatever  happened to the roll away theory when a player is tackled?

  • Like 3
Legs, Dews, Legs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, redjonn said:

Hill should get banned for his very late hit on Myler earlier in the game that the ref missed. He may get more because he lifted Myler in a prone position just like if you lift a injured player.

 The ‘earlier in the game’ incident saw Hill collide with Myler after the Leeds player’s kick. He ran at Myler with his arms apart, nothing late about his movements, but Myler played for a penalty by pretending injury. 
 

The second half incident was Myler cheating again, he lifted himself; having said that, Hill should have released him earlier. 
 

I have seen Myler do these little things before, but then again, which player hasn’t?

I dislike the ‘dominant’ and ‘surrender’ calls by a referee. If the ball carrying player is tackled, then he is tackled, without another defender being allowed to fall top. Whatever  happened to the roll away theory when a player is tackled?

Legs, Dews, Legs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cerulean said:

Sorry - and you can look this up - but there are significant studies, good quality peer reviewed science, showing that referees, judges and umpires show bias; home teams, big names, and favourites being particular beneficiaries. And, yes, shirt colour has an impact. We all carry biases, conscious or unconscious, and referees are no different. Constant vigilance is a good way to reduce the effect.

What’s the point in turning up at sports events then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ant said:

That Fages who went off with an HIA and didn't come back on? 

Sure, he was diving 

As a matter of fact Fages passed his HIA, it was Watson who chose not to put him back on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are far too many incidents where a player is tackled, and having one leg lifted by the defender to help complete the tackle, then lifts his other leg into the air to win a penalty. I'm not an expert, but I can't see that one leg being lifted would cause the other one to do the same. 

Last night was the first time I've seen anyone throw both their legs into the air though. Congratulations to Mr Myler for setting a new standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You must remember that Myler has `previous` and he will always be labelled a cheat by the Salford fanbase after conning James Child a few years ago to earn a penalty at the death bang in front of the sticks to beat the Reds at Headingley.    He cheated again last night and won the Loiners another 2 points.   Well said Phil Clarke.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

These bias play out differently though. Fans are much more biased than refs.

Subconscious bias is a thing, but shouldn't be used in an attempt to prove refs are corrupt. I would argue they try everything not to be biased.

I completely agree. Referees do a difficult job very well, and make very few mistakes; the mistakes they do make should be excused amongst the hundreds of marginal decisions they have to evaluate. They most certainly are not corrupt, and surely do everything they can to eliminate unconscious bias. Fans probably do not work so hard to eliminate unconscious bias.

Referees have, though, chosen to perforn on a stage, and scrutiny and evaluation are inevitable. I would suggest that proper scrutiny and evaluation are essential.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Human Punk said:

There are far too many incidents where a player is tackled, and having one leg lifted by the defender to help complete the tackle, then lifts his other leg into the air to win a penalty. I'm not an expert, but I can't see that one leg being lifted would cause the other one to do the same. 

Last night was the first time I've seen anyone throw both their legs into the air though. Congratulations to Mr Myler for setting a new standard.

So blinkered, hill clearly lifts him then drops him head first downwards, hill doest lift him, releases him he doesn’t get penalised. Hill did it its entirely his fault. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Segovia Carpet said:

You must remember that Myler has `previous` and he will always be labelled a cheat by the Salford fanbase after conning James Child a few years ago to earn a penalty at the death bang in front of the sticks to beat the Reds at Headingley.    He cheated again last night and won the Loiners another 2 points.   Well said Phil Clarke.

 

 

Well said. I bet fans of most clubs can point to at least one incident where the former Mr Skelton has conned them out of 2 points too.

Shame there are more Cyclops' (Cyclopii?🤔) in Leeds than there were on the island of Sicily and they refuse to acknowledge it. They're great at missing blatant forward passes too.😁👨‍🦯

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SalfordSlim said:

Well said. I bet fans of most clubs can point to at least one incident where the former Mr Skelton has conned them out of 2 points too.

Shame there are more Cyclops' (Cyclopii?🤔) in Leeds than there were on the island of Sicily and they refuse to acknowledge it. They're great at missing blatant forward passes too.😁👨‍🦯

 

Like I said, the sudden appearance of Salford fans on this thread is possibly my favourite thing 😄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People's opinions are now form d and won't change.

Some believe Hill lifted, some believe Myler jumped 

For me, at best it was exaggerated by Mylers in an attempt to mislead the officials, at worse putting himself in a bad position to get an opposition player sent off.

I don't believe any more debate will change anyone's mind from their formed view.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, the actual game, I thought it was a good contest between 2 committed sides battling for 2 points for different reasons, I may be slightly biased but I thought we were the better side for most of it and we seemed to dominate possession, especially in the 2nd quarter when Leeds were hanging on, BUT, we didn't do enough to win the game I thought, some of our execution and timing was off, passing, running etc, we needed to more or less shut the game down in the 2nd/3rd quarters but failed to do so, Leeds on the other hand I thought were far more clinical and composed when near our line.

Our goal kicking didn't help either, kick those goals and we win, however, we did enough to give ourselves the lead and were hanging on for the 2 points until....

Right so first of all, Myler surrenders to the tackler , Hill is then entitled to keep hold of Myler until the referee tells him tackle complete and move, up until Myler stands up, Hill has committed no offence, Myler then instigates the action by pushing himself up and over while Hill still has hold of him, you can see the surprise on Hill's face when Myler does his leaping Salmon act, I will say though, that Hill COULD have released Myler earlier but why would he? he was the dominant tackler and had every right to have his arms around Myler.

I get most Leeds fans and some others won't agree but honestly, do you think a human being is physically and scientifically capable of lifting another (albeit slightly smaller) human being off their feet and tip them over, whilst still kneeling themselves? It may be possible but it would take a massive effort to do that, Chris Hill doesn't show any major effort in "lifting" Myler up, so people can draw their own conclusions.

I am disappointed in losing the game as I always am when Huddersfield lose, but I wouldn't have been too bothered as I said, we probably deserved to lose, we still had a set to defend and failed to- although you'd suspect Austin wouldn't have scored had Hill been in his defensive position, but, the manner of the defeat, the fact that a blatant act of gamesmanship and sh1thousery has led directly to it is a hard pill to swallow.

It's something the sport really does need to look at stamping out.

As a fellow Giants fans said to me last night, we, as a sport are trying to attract bigger investment and audiences and hope a successful world cup will help, then we see a blatant act of cheating rewarded like that, it doesn't sit right.

Edited by meast
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rhinos78 said:

Leeds were dreadful, we'l rarely play as bad as that and win. A decent team would of been well out of site before Hills foul on myler, especially against 12 men for 20 mins.

 

Not great but we'l take it and move on

That's kind of my thought process, we should have been out of sight by half time, but just don't have enough to turn possesion and dominance into points, Saints and Wigan, and to a lesser extent, Salford do.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, meast said:

First of all, the actual game, I thought it was a good contest between 2 committed sides battling for 2 points for different reasons, I may be slightly biased but I thought we were the better side for most of it and we seemed to dominate possession, especially in the 2nd quarter when Leeds were hanging on, BUT, we didn't do enough to win the game I thought, some of our execution and timing was off, passing, running etc, we needed to more or less shut the game down in the 2nd/3rd quarters but failed to do so, Leeds on the other hand I thought were far more clinical and composed when near our line.

Our goal kicking didn't help either, kick those goals and we win, however, we did enough to give ourselves the lead and were hanging on for the 2 points until....

Right so first of all, Myler surrenders to the tackler , Hill is then entitled to keep hold of Myler until the referee tells him tackle complete and move, up until Myler stands up, Hill has committed no offence, Myler then instigates the action by pushing himself up and over while Hill still has hold of him, you can see the surprise on Hill's face when Myler does his leaping Salmon act, I will say though, that Hill COULD have released Myler earlier but why would he? he was the dominant tackler and had every right to have his arms around Myler.

I get most Leeds fans and some others won't agree but honestly, do you think a human being is physically and scientifically capable of lifting another (albeit slightly smaller) human being off their feet and tip them over, whilst still kneeling themselves? It may be possible but it would take a massive effort to do that, Chris Hill doesn't show any major effort in picking Myler up, so people can draw their own conclusions.

I am disappointed in losing the game as I always am when Huddersfield lose, but I wouldn't have been too bothered as I said, we probably deserved to lose, we still had a set to defend and failed to- although you'd suspect Austin wouldn't have scored had Hill been in his defensive position, but, the manner of the defeat, the fact that a blatant act of gamesmanship and sh1thousery has led directly to it is a hard pill to swallow.

It's something the sport really does need to look at stamping out.

As a fellow Giants fans said to me last night, we, as a sport are trying to attract bigger investment and audiences and hope a successful world cup will help, then we see a blatant act of cheating rewarded like that, it doesn't sit right.

You remember how surprised Hill was when he claimed Miloudi bit him for Wire? 

He has an almost perfect surprised face 😆

Edited by Dave T
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another thing, last time we played Leeds, they put Fages out of the game with late hits, no penalties or on field sanctions, Tetevano, Bentley x2, and Austin were picked out by the MRP, Tetevano was charged and given a 2 match ban.

Yesterday, the same thing happens, all teams target the kicker, that's part of the game, but to put the same player out of the game with the same tactics and same injury twice in succession, coincidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, meast said:

Sorry, can't recall Dave

It was a huge thread here mate.  He claimed he was bitten,  when it *may* have been him putting his for arm across the mouth of the Hull player. 

I love Hill,  but he knows how to play the innocent victim. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, meast said:

And another thing, last time we played Leeds, they put Fages out of the game with late hits, no penalties or on field sanctions, Tetevano, Bentley x2, and Austin were picked out by the MRP, Tetevano was charged and given a 2 match ban.

"Picked out by the MRP".

You forgot to say, "and had no case to answer".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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