Yeah, I thought McManus was close to Newcastle's best last night. Was targeted with the boot and survived that, also came in off his wing a few times to clean up, one ball and all tackle stands out in memory. It's not something that comes across on TV, but he was also running further infield than Uate was on the opposite flank. Playing it safe and making sure he didn't get pushed into touch I assume.
Hate that idea. Getting points for a loss is stupid, makes it easier to reach the finals whilst losing. Win, lose, draw. Simple
Wtf does that mean? Easily play Origin again as in it wouldn't be difficult for him to get dressed and walk out onto the field and play?
Getting the same for losing after 85 minutes, by a point, as getting flogged by 60, is what's stupid. Why is being rewarded for a loss, stupid, anyway? Why should silver and bronze medallists be removed from the Olympics? Are you so stupid that you need a simplistic NRL points system so you can sleep at night?
As in he wouldn't look out of place in the side. I really didn't see the need to question that part of his post.
Tahu's defence should never come into the discussion when people are putting forward Junior Sau as a potential replacement though. If Tahu didn't have brain damage I'd be advocating his Origin selection, but I'm not because he repeatedly makes stupid decisions in defence. But it's hardly like that's a negative point when comparing him to Junior Sau, Wes Naiqama or even Uate.
Hardly stupid, the current system works fine. Strikes me as dumb to think "awes my poor team lost by a point, I want a point for losing anyway." it's as smarts as the AFL rewarding a point for a missed goal. So what if scores are level at the 80th minute and a field goal is kicked after the siren, does that then not deserve a point also? Stupid shit.
Looks like Sau will get at least a week and possibly longer depending on how Tahu pulls up with that hammy.
Wtf does that even mean? By what standard does it "work" where the proposed system does not? Define, "works." It's nothing like that at all ffs. See now you're just obfuscating the issue. I didn't say my system was perfect. I simply stated that it's fairer. You don't like the idea that a simple field goal would be the difference between a losing team getting a point and another losing team not.......Yet you're fine with a team losing by a point getting nothing, the same as a team losing by 60. Ridiculous.
Absolutely fine with that. May as well have the competition decided by for and against if you're not.
That's the point I pretty much made which is why it'd be stupid to change the way points are awarded. Just kents with stupid ideas that they think will benefit the game, like kents advocating that 20/40 rule and other shit like that.
Yeah absolutely. I just see golden point results as well.. different results entirely. They were drawn matches with a winner decided after the fact; it's a totally different thing to giving different points for the margin of victory inside regular time. Suggesting otherwise is merely Cevnoing the debate.
The argument against my system that you're making is even stronger against the current system which you support. You can't say, well it's unfair for a team who loses just before FT by a point. You want to put them on the same block as a team that loses by 60 ffs. You don't like the idea of giving points to a losing side, so you drag out a rare scenario as if it negates the system because of it not being perfect. The system you advocate is far, far less perfect.
