Boy! Can I have your glasses? Definitely Rose coloured there @TheButts.
The game was not good but to insinuate that Gordon were ever in it was more than far fetched. The double yellow card will not stop that player spending the best part of the year in casual shoes at the game. Vicious, High and the culprit hung on to the randwick player for maximum effect. 8, 9, maybe 10 tight heads showed that Gordon were on the back foot the entire time. Randwick were not good except for maybe 3 players, but the ref was out of his depth even at this level. His inability to control rucks from the beginning seemed to get every player pissed off. It seemed that just randwick voiced their opinions. IMHO the score was a fair reflection of the game
Not too sure who has the glasses on, but the Gordon side would have been only 6 points behind if that penalty had gone over towards the end of the match.
Fair send off, but I hope the judiciary is more fair minded that you. I've got the pics, and first contact was across the shoulders and chest, arm grasping the opposite shoulder, no swinging involved. "Vicious" seems a bit over the top, although it did look "spectacular". Even the ref thought it only needed a yellow - it was only the double that sent him off for the match.
The Randwick pack was certainly terrific, and even "clear coloured glasses" would have to say that Gordon hanging in there after losing all those tight heads was a great effort.
Can you remember the scores at half time in both games??? Not too sure that "never in it" is a correct statement.
But . . . . Randwick won both games and rightly so. There were the better team on the day, and that's no insinuation.