Super AU R2 - Reds v Rebels Suncorp Stadium 26/2
- Thread starter TSR
- Start date
drewprint
Dick Tooth (41)
Hmm maybe. I do expect better quality play from the Reds. Other states may not have that same ambition.
PhilClinton
Mark Loane (55)
I’m starting to think he’s a robot sent from the NRL
I've noticed it a few times lately. It seems like the referees are no longer enforcing that law. Which is sad, transferring the ball back is a skill.
Forcefield
Ken Catchpole (46)
Not having a go at the Rebels because they generally played a smart game plan, but did they at any point in time have possession of the ball in the Reds 22?
TSR
Andrew Slack (58)
Yeah - I thought we got away with one there.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
I was watching game here in NZ and when I saw that I though the ref would turn down try, and I was supporting Reds! I am of the school that thinks instead of these stupid law variations, why don't we just enforce the laws we have
.All in all game was ok , shows it perhaps needed a little more of something when the Stan broadcast seemed to think the main highlight was a tackle that needed to be replayed 726 bloody times. Was intereted to see in first half Tupou was either boring in on scrums or was getting turned in, seemed to scrum straigher when he came back on but was definitely struggling first half.
Might struggle to stay up to midnight to watch game tonight, especially as I don'thave a horse in the race, and the quality of both teams last week was I thought poor. Might just watch Canes/Blues and then get up at 6 watch Wales/Poms.
Dan54
David Wilson (68)
I think Dewprint right Dc, I am a rugby tragic, and a bit of a Reds supporter, but I didn't really think that the game was one that would hook casual fans. Very much looked like some headless chook stuff at times, and if a tackle was as it seems by the number of bloody replays of it the highlight of night ,well
.Probably the best for a casual fan was if they came in at end when the score changed and Reds snatched it.
eastman
John Solomon (38)
It was a bloody average stop-start game. For all this ‘praise’ of playing smart, no team should should be rewarded for not even attempting to play any rugby.
We are lucky that one wasn’t televised on free to air.
What was smart about the Rebels? I thought they were decidedly average. Note I was at the game and haven’t watched the replay yet. The Reds were terrible but played rugby. Their halves were very very poor and their kicking game put themselves under huge pressure. Their discipline continues to be frustratingly bad and their handling was crap let alone the decision making (mostly by Tate and JOC (James O'Connor)).
Yet the Rebels never looked like threatening them in attack. They had a good kicking game and took every shot available and that’s it. They brought nothing to last night other than a boot and cynical play. If the Reds had not been so poor they would have won by 50 and the Rebels would’ve played EXACTLY the same - would they still be praised as having played “smart”?
Yet the Rebels never looked like threatening them in attack. They had a good kicking game and took every shot available and that’s it. They brought nothing to last night other than a boot and cynical play. If the Reds had not been so poor they would have won by 50 and the Rebels would’ve played EXACTLY the same - would they still be praised as having played “smart”?
wamberal
Phil Kearns (64)
They had a smart game plan, especially considering the handicaps they were operating under because of the pandemic.
I can understand your angst, Reg. However the Reds played as well as they were allowed to. Good on the Rebels. Almost snatched it.
The Nomad
Bob Davidson (42)
Think it maybe seen as “smart” rugby only by comparison to what the Reds offered up.
The Rebels did exactly what they were capable of last night . They never really threatened in attack and points came from errors and poor discipline from the Reds.
Had the Reds just played structured rugby and taken the chances they were offered , the Rebels would have looked quite ordinary. But they didn’t . Premeditated, up tempo , razzle dazzle rugby should be shelved as a failure for future game plan options .
The Rebels did exactly what they were capable of last night . They never really threatened in attack and points came from errors and poor discipline from the Reds.
Had the Reds just played structured rugby and taken the chances they were offered , the Rebels would have looked quite ordinary. But they didn’t . Premeditated, up tempo , razzle dazzle rugby should be shelved as a failure for future game plan options .
Forcefield
Ken Catchpole (46)
The Rebels didn't lose their calm. They continued to play to the weaknesses of their opposition. That is smart rugby. It wasn't pretty and it wasn't exactly skillful and it was like watching mud dry, but it very nearly won them a game they shouldn't've have. If the Rebels played the same way and the Reds had not been so poor, then no, that would not have been smart. But the Reds were poor with tactics straight out of the Michael Cheika play book. I was relieved the Reds won. I imagine a few Reds supporters would have been tearing their hair out. I still can't fathom why O'Connor wasn't in the refs ear about the number of penalties the Rebels gave up in the 22. That is poor captaincy.
Rebels3
Jim Lenehan (48)
I think the Rebels didn’t have many tackles in the 22 because the Reds would always give up a penalty as soon as the Rebels got in their half. If the Reds had better discipline who knows if the Rebels would of been able to breach the line, just like if the Reds had applied more scoreboard pressure by taking the points available then they might of won by 15.
formerflanker
Ken Catchpole (46)
Reece Hodge's covering tackle on Mafi was impressive. A try saver.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
What was the penalty count for each team?