• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Queensland Reds 2025

PhilClinton

Paul McLean (56)
My issue is more that the errors he's making aren't just positional, he's dropped plenty of ball, thrown a lot of rubbish passes.

Sure, he's out of sorts and probably thinking too much about what his role is. But those core skills are letting him down.

He's looked average in that department even for a depth player.
 

Strewthcobber

David Codey (61)
It appears Lynagh will be available for the weekend. The article on rugby.com.au today seems to suggest his absence was linked to the head knock against the Force.

Steadying flyhalf Tom Lynagh, who copped a head knock against the Western Force last week, should also be fit after being a late scratching against the Crusaders.

The Reds are also without injured Test aspirants Lukhan Salakaia-Loto, Josh Flook, Jock Campbell and Seru Uru.
 

Major Tom

Ward Prentice (10)
Don't think so - mustn't believe it warranted a red card (guess maybe they thought indirect contact or body first then head, reducing force?). I don't actually no however, nor necessarily agree.
Not sure the system makes sense. I find it mindboggling that there is radio silence from Super Rugby on this. It's like they're pretending it didn't happen.
I would accept if they put out a statement saying that they've reviewed it and deemed that due to mitigating circumstances or low-level head contact etc etc that no action is needed. But to yellow card Hunter the week before for the same tackle and also sanction him for the other tackle that was reviewed and cleared in real time just shows you how inconsistent the process is. Confusing.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
What sports/competitions issue press releases for judiciary/foul play issues that aren't considered to warrant further action?

I'm not saying that it wouldn't be a good thing to have but based on the fact that much larger and well resourced rugby competitions and other sports don't do it, is it reasonable to expect Super Rugby to do it?
 

JRugby2

Ron Walden (29)
Not sure the system makes sense. I find it mindboggling that there is radio silence from Super Rugby on this. It's like they're pretending it didn't happen.
I would accept if they put out a statement saying that they've reviewed it and deemed that due to mitigating circumstances or low-level head contact etc etc that no action is needed. But to yellow card Hunter the week before for the same tackle and also sanction him for the other tackle that was reviewed and cleared in real time just shows you how inconsistent the process is. Confusing.
Valid frustration but equally you can't expect them to provide a running commentary on decisions either way.

Raises more questions like
- which incidents do you comment on, and how do you decide what they are?
- how much detail do you provide?
- what is the net outcome? Does the public truly get benefit out of it - or does it just create more noise and erode trust further (only need to look at the referee decisions thread to see their is rarely universal agreement of the application of law, in most circumstances)

NRL just today are reporting they are going to stop doing this exact thing because it added no value, and did more harm then good.

Also, I get the frustration but the Hunter tackle and this one we're completely different tackles so no way you can compare them and the outcomes to draw a parallel. FWIW - I believe in both cases they are wrong (Hunter should have been cleared at judiciary and Dolly should have at least seen yellow)
 
Last edited:

Major Tom

Ward Prentice (10)
What sports/competitions issue press releases for judiciary/foul play issues that aren't considered to warrant further action?

I'm not saying that it wouldn't be a good thing to have but based on the fact that much larger and well resourced rugby competitions and other sports don't do it, is it reasonable to expect Super Rugby to do it?
Not saying there needs to be a press conference but AFL and NRL would have reporters asking the question. of the league. I suppose that's on the media there. I don't know, just seems like a stich up and you have fans literally unsure if the process has been followed. Lynagh originally failed HIA so I would have thought officials would be keen to investigate the incident (maybe they did) given it's the type of tackle they have been determined to get rid of.
 

PhilClinton

Paul McLean (56)
Newstead Brewing Co officially announced their closure today, although it was known for a while by locals.

The team at Newstead have always been a strong supporter of QLD rugby so it is a shame to lose them as another victim of the tough conditions in Brisbane hospo world at the moment.

Will be interesting to see if another vendor tries to open up in their space opposite Suncorp. Although I do feel like that area is pretty much only good for business on game days and also, as the Newstead crew know, very prone to flooding.
 

Major Tom

Ward Prentice (10)
Valid frustration but equally you can't expect them to provide a running commentary on decisions either way.

Raises more questions like
- which incidents do you comment on, and how do you decide what they are?
- how much detail do you provide?
- what is the net outcome? Does the public truly get benefit out of it - or does it just create more noise and erode trust further (only need to look at the referee decisions thread to see their is rarely universal agreement of the application of law, in most circumstances)

NRL just today are reporting they are going to stop doing this exact thing because it added no value, and did more harm then good.

Also, I get the frustration but the Hunter tackle and this one we're completely different tackles so no way you can compare them and the outcomes to draw a parallel. FWIW - I believe in both cases they are wrong (Hunter should have been cleared at judiciary and Dolly should have at least seen yellow)
I get the point about not opening a running commentary but it seems very inconsistent.
FYI I was first talking about the one he got yellow carded for mate. That seemed very similar to Dolly's.
 

Strewthcobber

David Codey (61)
I appreciate that every player is going to need specialised care with head impacts, but the time-line on Lynagh has been pretty odd.

He went down in the tackle, but actually shook off the trainers, and was allowed to play on for the minute or so until half time. He wasn't actually removed from the field at that point. Presumably he then was assessed in the sheds and failed HIA1. He then passed HIA2 two hours later, and I'm guessing HIA3 on Monday. Trained all week (?) and then pulled out just before the game on Saturday.

I don't think we know now if he was ever diagnosed with concussion or not, and we don't know why he missed the Crusaders game.

Strange one
 

Adam84

John Eales (66)
I appreciate that every player is going to need specialised care with head impacts, but the time-line on Lynagh has been pretty odd.

He went down in the tackle, but actually shook off the trainers, and was allowed to play on for the minute or so until half time. He wasn't actually removed from the field at that point. Presumably he then was assessed in the sheds and failed HIA1. He then passed HIA2 two hours later, and I'm guessing HIA3 on Monday. Trained all week (?) and then pulled out just before the game on Saturday.

I don't think we know now if he was ever diagnosed with concussion or not, and we don't know why he missed the Crusaders game.

Strange one

Players removed from the game under HIA1 as Criteria 2 concussion can return within 7 days. But they need to pass HIA3, and before returning to contact they still need to pass an additional assessment by a specialist doctor, which can take place up to the day of playing.

Suspect this is what took place, hence why he was initially on the bench(wasn't able to participate in contact) and was a late scratching because he wasn't given permission by the doctor on day 7.
 

Adam84

John Eales (66)
Nostalgic

IMG_7224.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Tomthumb

Peter Fenwicke (45)
I appreciate that every player is going to need specialised care with head impacts, but the time-line on Lynagh has been pretty odd.

He went down in the tackle, but actually shook off the trainers, and was allowed to play on for the minute or so until half time. He wasn't actually removed from the field at that point. Presumably he then was assessed in the sheds and failed HIA1. He then passed HIA2 two hours later, and I'm guessing HIA3 on Monday. Trained all week (?) and then pulled out just before the game on Saturday.

I don't think we know now if he was ever diagnosed with concussion or not, and we don't know why he missed the Crusaders game.

Strange one
Doran inferred it was another niggle in his leg that kept him out last year that no one can really diagnose
 

JRugby2

Ron Walden (29)
Doran inferred it was another niggle in his leg that kept him out last year that no one can really diagnose
I listened to this - my immediate reaction was he was just yabbering - rather than it being what kept him out.

He didn't mention that he heard something from someone inside the reds. To me it just sounded like he was recalling that, that was the case last year - and maybe it was the reason he was out. Felt like he was trying to manufacture an angle without actually having anything to back it up.
 
Top