Tuesday 25 October: PNG vs Cook Islands KO 19:30 BST

[The Masked Poster]

1 hour ago, Padge said:

Makes it easier for commentators when they get used to it as it doesn't matter if they are commentating on a women's or man's game, its just the player. What's the problem.

How does it make it easier for commentators if we have a game played by men to say "man of the match" versus a game played by women to say "woman of the match,"? There's hardly any difficulty in either...so yes what's the problem? 

[Just Browny]

It was very enjoyable, although both sides flirted with the line between very physical and very dangerous a few times. There will be some very sore bodies after that game.

PNG are a big side close up. To state the obvious, if they had a Mitchell Moses or a Luke Keary in the middle of it all they would be a hell of a side.

[Padge]

Just now, The Masked Poster said:

How does it make it easier for commentators if we have a game played by men to say "man of the match" versus a game played by women to say "woman of the match,"? There's hardly any difficulty in either...so yes what's the problem? 

If you can't understand its simpler I can't help you, my explanation would obviously confuse you.*

*See also Futtocks explanation earlier.

[Futtocks]

2 hours ago, Padge said:

Gellig does a Gelling interview, sod the rugby here is an advert for the Cook Island Tourist Board

Next RWC, we get Gelling and Jake Mamo to present alternative coverage of the whole thing. It might put Roy & HG out of work.

[StandOffHalf]

1 hour ago, Padge said:

That was a try, the ball never separated from his hand, in that situation finger tip pressure is enough. If he had lost contact he would have to fully regather the ball. TRY,TRY, TRY all the way.

No, when carrying the ball, control for a ''proper grounding'' is required.

[Ullman]

2 hours ago, Futtocks said:

The Kumuls have weleased Wodwick!

Post of the tournament.

So far...

[Dunbar]

6 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

How does it make it easier for commentators if we have a game played by men to say "man of the match" versus a game played by women to say "woman of the match,"? There's hardly any difficulty in either...so yes what's the problem? 

We have three simultaneous World Cup's (well 4 with the PDRL comp).

One is played by men, one is played by women and one with mixed teams.  Why is player of the match not just the best solution all round.

[The Masked Poster]

4 minutes ago, Padge said:

If you can't understand its simpler I can't help you, my explanation would obviously confuse you.*

*See also Futtocks explanation earlier.

I think you are the one trying to complicate things. Man of match or Woman of match. It literally doesn't get any simpler.

[The Masked Poster]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

We have three simultaneous World Cup's (well 4 with the PDRL comp).

One is played by men, one is played by women and one with mixed teams.  Why is player of the match not just the best solution all round.

Eh? Surely that's just lowest case denominator? If we go have a case of the PDRL, then apply common sense as it happens. 

[Padge]

6 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

No, when carrying the ball, control for a ''proper grounding'' is required.

You obviously do not listen to what the video refs call. They look for separation between hand and ball, grounding requires downward pressure, no separation then fingers on the ball are enough downward pressure. 

It isn't complicated to understand, if you choose to understand it.

[Dunbar]

3 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

Eh? Surely that's just lowest case denominator? If we go have a case of the PDRL, then apply common sense as it happens. 

Yes, and I am saying that common sense is using the sensible term 'player of the match' across the board.

[Dunbar]

1 minute ago, Padge said:

You obviously do not listen to what the video refs call. They look for separation between hand and ball, grounding requires downward pressure, no separation then fingers on the ball are enough downward pressure. 

It isn't complicated to understand, if you choose to understand it.

In the NRL, if a player loses control of the ball, they are required to regrasp it before grounding.  Therefore that try would not have been given.

I assume that there is an international interpretation otherwise it is a lottery on what nationality the video ref is.

[Padge]

5 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

Eh? Surely that's just lowest case denominator? If we go have a case of the PDRL, then apply common sense as it happens. 

If you always use player of the match you will never get it wrong.

If you use man, woman, one legged orphan of the match you will, with certainty, get it wrong at some point.

 

[StandOffHalf]

3 minutes ago, Padge said:

You obviously do not listen to what the video refs call. They look for separation between hand and ball, grounding requires downward pressure, no separation then fingers on the ball are enough downward pressure. 

It isn't complicated to understand, if you choose to understand it.

Correct grounding where the ball is under control is needed when in possession. No separation is only one part of it and is a good indication of the ball not being lost.

When the ball is thrown to the ground with no control, separation is irrelevant.

[Padge]

Just now, Dunbar said:

In the NRL, if a player loses control of the ball, they are required to regrasp it before grounding.  Therefore that try would not have been given.

I assume that there is an international interpretation otherwise it is a lottery on what nationality the video ref is.

I posted the exact same earlier (go back and read it), if he loses possession, i.e. separation from hand and ball, he must regather, he didn't separate.

I also I don't give f*** what the Aussies do (we do the same by the way), they are irrelevant.

[Ullman]

3 hours ago, Futtocks said:

It wasn't that long ago today that Vossy was stranded at Crewe station, so it's good to hear he got to the game.

He wanted to go to Warrington but they took on him on to Crewe?

[Dunbar]

2 minutes ago, Padge said:

I posted the exact same earlier (go back and read it), if he loses possession, i.e. separation from hand and ball, he must regather, he didn't separate.

I also I don't give f*** what the Aussies do (we do the same by the way), they are irrelevant.

I didn't realise we were running this tournament on Super League laws, I thought it was international laws.

Anyway, as always with things, it would be useful to see the actual law as it is laid out.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Ullman said:

He wanted to go to Warrington but they took on him on to Crewe?

 

[Ullman]

1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

A very enjoyable game overall.  One of the best of the competition so far.

Absolutely loved it.  Great game and the BBC coverage was outstanding again. They're adding a real sense of occasion to the tournament and the highlights reels they put together are superb.

[Ullman]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

 

Good man 

[StandOffHalf]

Fun game, albeit one that had a few unfortunate and wince-inducing high shots.

The Kukis were really missing control and clinicality in the halves. They lacked a cutting edge to ice the cake. It was a good, honest winter stew that needed a little seasoning, but the shakers were empty.

PNG good value for the margin of victory. I always enjoy watching them play.

[gingerjon]

21 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

I think you are the one trying to complicate things. Man of match or Woman of match. It literally doesn't get any simpler.

Player of the Match - one option.

Man of the Match, Woman of the Match, Man or Woman of the Match - three options.

Now, which were you saying was simpler?

[Padge]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

I didn't realise we were running this tournament on Super League laws, I thought it was international laws.

Anyway, as always with things, it would be useful to see the actual law as it is laid out.

The international laws of the game are freely available all over the internet.

Go check them, you won't find what you are looking for.

The published laws do not include the current interpretations, they are guide to the principles of the game.

[UTK]

PNG missing the talent of Coates and Gebbie on the wings, though Rodrick Tai is doing a fairly good job covering one side.

Thought they took Jacob Alick out of the middle for too long, he's the biggest Kumul running around and provides a nice ball playing link to the edges. Russell didn't appear quite as effective at lock as he did on the edges.

The Kukis are a fascinating side, so many genuine talents for such a small population and diaspora. The interesting part is Kayal Iro is probably their best player, yet is their only real domestic product (Moeroa moved at Aus at a very young age while Iro left for NZ in his teens).

Not sure what the best case scenario is for the Kukis, realistically their potential domestic production is heavily capped but their diaspora obviously has a strong connection to league that allows them to field a relatively competitive side. An asset to our game in any case.

 

[Dunbar]

7 minutes ago, Padge said:

The international laws of the game are freely available all over the internet.

Go check them, you won't find what you are looking for.

The published laws do not include the current interpretations, they are guide to the principles of the game.

So, I am back to my first question.  Whose interpretations are we using for this tournament?