Since State of Origin 1 ended quite satisfactorily on the scoreboard the question has been whether Queensland can make history with four series in a row. We are going to have to do a lot of this:
if we want this:
(Both photographs from Brisbane Times.)
Not much to say, really. On the news last night we were told that Queensland have had the smoothest preparation evah, while the Blues have had the most disrupted preparation of all time. Anyone who knows anything about rugby league will tell you that means NSW are bound to win comfortably.
In any case I do sincerely hope we are not talking about refereeing decisions after the match and especially not that foot again:
Go the mighty maroons!
I wrote this post last night. What do we hear today? Biological warfare, that’s what!
Today on local radio Richard Fidler and Kelly Higgins-Devine, both Victorians who have acclimatised well, reckoned it could be disinformation from the Queensland camp. It’s a plot to stop the NSW players from running at Lockyer when they’ve got the ball and from tackling him when he’s got it.
I blanked out their faces and tried to look just at the torsos, but I still don’t find them attractive.
The first photo shows QLD performing a head-high tackle so I am assuming that QLD need to cheat to win. I’ve no doubt the same tactics will be used tonight and as a proud New South Welshman I’ll finish by saying that Queensland sucks because they can’t take the cup by playing fair. They never have and they never will.
Hah
Look Brian, on paper the Blues can’t win this. The Qld backline is just too good. But this is State of Origin and paper calculations go out the window.
Another what if… what if this is all rigged? Then Qld would lose tonight in order to generate interest for the decider.
It does not even have to involve the players.
The rules must be changed regarding penalties and infringements that draw penalties. Otherwise, the game is ripe for corruption in the future, if it hasn’t already happened. This is a loaded gun. There are huge amounts of money in betting on the code that are involved.
Good luck Bri, and may the best team win.
That foot is still in. Harrigan you traitor!
A lot of grapple tackles required to win eh?
NSW for the first 30 Minutes was playing like a 3rd grade side or worse. That said Queensland should still win. Even if the Archer bias wasn’t favouring them as it always done.
And yes that QLD “Try” was a knock on – if the ball goes backwards then bounces forward, that constitutes a knock on these days.
This may be the poorest origin match I’ve seen in terms of mutual performances. It’d be hard to argue there’s many players out there playing at a competent club level, let alone origin level.
Unfortunately the refereeing will be talked about.
In the photo Creagh’s upper arm is determining where Hodges arm ends up. Compare that if you dare with what Barrett did to Inglis.
And NSW just gets penalised vs we lose a player for 60 minutes of the match. It may be the way the rules are but it’s definitely not fair.
I think the fix is in, just as I predicted.
Under 9 quality players triumph over th under 8s.
Staggering ineptitude all round tonight.
Brian: it’s karma for Inglis being a traitor to his actual state.
Worst. Origin. Ever.
Bryn, whatever. Did you know that Peter Sterling was born in Toowoomba?
But seriously, for years it has been obvious that the rules should be changed so that the infringing team does not have an advantage. As it was we played 59 minutes with 16 men and were always going to have trouble with condition towards the end of the match. It happened in SOO 1 when Hodges went off after 25 minutes.
I reckon Barrett should have been sat on his bum for as long as the guy he hit was off the field. I’m not saying he should have been ‘sent off’, just not available, so both teams have the same number of players to call on.
Vee, I didn’t enjoy it much from the Inglis knockout to the last few minutes. There was a lot of dropped ball, but there always is at night. Also the other team has to be given some credit for the vigour of their defence.
There’s a point I want to know about, if anyone knows the rules in relation to Haynes’ second try. Most of the (NSW) experts seemed to think it should have been “no try” because Folau was held in the marker position. What I’d like to know is whether the dummy half has to line up directly behind the player playing the ball. It seemed to me that Haynes was side-on as well as to the side rather than directly behind.
Here are the match stats.
Once again NSW made more metres.
Well I enjoyed it here in Perth right team won,so I,m happy.
I was assuming the NSW blokes forget to wash their hands with soap after moisteurising. Jebus DROP THE BALL AGAIN YOU NUMB NUTSES!
I did enjoy Phil the Dill’s abject disappointment about the poncy quality of the biff though. Cattle Dog!
The difference was simple. When QLD were out on their feet in the second half, when they shouldn’t have had any stamina left, when they had every right to say enough, they kept on going. That sort of spirit you can’t coach against and for that, they deservedly won the game and the series.
Hopefully next year, the NSW selectors (and it better not be the same bunch from this year) will pick a full compliment of players. Hayne tried to win the game by himself but I’d say he’d appreciate some support.
Shaun, when I heard that 5 or 6 Queenslanders had had the shits and were spewing their guts out, I thought, that’s it, they’ll get us in the second half. Then when we lost Inglis, it made things worse. From the 35th minute ‘no try’ because of a knock-on ruling, which would have made the score 24-6 if we’d scored and converted, again I fully expected to lose.
But in the second half the Qld defence didn’t tire as much as it did in the first game, when for a time NSW were making about 70m every set.
So you’re right, they gutsed it out.
Brian, no-one is disputing that the NSW side are made up of genetically perfect athletes. What you need to remember is that QLD have their ways – putting idiots like Tony Archer on their payroll and trying to put the Blues in a false sense of security with all that BS about their players having the trots.
I also believe that the tackle on Inglis was within the rules. It was not a head-high tackle – Inglis took a dive like his mate Israel Folau is known for.
Without prejudice, the refereeing right across the Rubgy League is a disgrace, regardless of which teams are on the field. These people have to smarten up their act or lose credibility.
The fact is, the most entertaining part of the game was the don’t argue handed to Michael Crocker and the two NSW tries that followed.
I’ve always wondered why we pick Crocker. He drops the ball too much.
LW, on first viewing I was prepared to accept that Barrett’s tackle was ‘reckless’ but not intentional. As to being within the rules, you can’t be serious! My wife reckons she read Barrett’s body language and she thinks, like Ray Hadley, he took Inglis out. On watching a replay I’d have to say the arm was swung with force you wouldn’t associate with making a tackle.
The best picture gallery I saw was this one from the SMH. You’ll find there a shot of the tackle with Barrett’s arm in full contact with Inglis’s face. I simply note that Barrett’s right fist is clenched, whereas if you look at all the other tackles they use an open hand technique. Yeah, I know, he was trying to punch the ball out, yes?
It’s that sort of thing that makes mum’s choose another sport for their kids.
I thought Warren Ryan had it right on the ABC today when he said the Barrett should have been binned for 10 minutes while they assessed the seriousness of the offence. In this case Barrett should have taken no further part in the match, but could be replaced on the field after 10 minutes. As it is the main penalty is to the Cronulla football club.
Other pics in the gallery were also interesting. Phil Gould reckoned Billy Slater misjudged a leap for a high bomb on one occasion when he seemed to miss the ball. The photo shows Slater’s arms in ball catching position but what was there was not the ball which had shot out to the side but a NSW player’s arm. Probably all legit.
For those that still think Hayne runs on the balls of his feet (and believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden) there is a shot showing that Hayne, like everyone else, sprints with his heel touching the turf. Fast enough to out-run Slater, but with heels firmly planted.
As to Qld courage and the wog they had, there was story saying that for 20 minutes Meninga had no fit men on the bench. Myles said he “had a problem” and had to come off to change his duds. Meninga refused him and said later he was glad he wasn’t doing Myles’ laundry next day.
So the forwards are still trying to teach us about sprinting eh? Har har.
Sean, if you persist in your view then write to the referees’ boss. Ever since our discussion after SOO1 I’ve been taking note of side-on views of sprinting including actual sprinters. If you’ve done the same I’d be interested if you saw a single instance where the heel didn’t come in contact with the ground between where the leading leg makes contact with the ground and the body is in the perpendicular position above the leg.
I’m working on evidence, not on stuff out of coaching manuals. Good luck.