Lad had a good game, I hear... Positive comments only, save your lols for elsewhere.

Scored a good try, saved a few tries. Well played Mick.

He was excellent last week too. In defence especially. Sad to hear some Bulls "fans" booing him when his name was announced tonight. Hope his try shut them up.
Well played Platty.

Eleven words that say it all. Spot on.

He had a good game tonight. Let's hope he can continue for the rest of the season

Hope it helps get the fekkwits off his back.

Good game, good work for his first try, great in defence.

I propose a RAB policy of confronting those who irrationally abuse Platt at games. If people want to voice their frustrations when he knocks on etc, fair enough. But having his name read in the starting line up...

Next up, getting my Michael Platt/Thundercats song going.

I'm not a fan, but I'll praise him when he deserves praise and criticise when he deserves criticising.

A lot of the criticism he's recieved has been fair game in my books, but I agree that some of the abuse he recieves is out of order.

He missed a couple of tackles and cost us a penalty which resulted in a Hudds try.
He's got a long way to go before he proves himself IMO

He also scored one and saved another

I know that. He still has a long way to go though.
Picking a player up and dumping him over the line is against the rules. He should know that. To do it so close to the opposition line is a stupid thing to do. He has a tendency to brain-fart which he needs to stamp out of his game if he is to improve.

How did Worrincy play?



PS, Sheriffe was awful as usual.

Otherwise an outstanding team performance overall.

Steady there, fella.

Don't be too harsh, i think hes improving he right forward on one, maaybe two occassions.

I wasnt sure about that, i didnt think the tackle was complete so would that not allow him to challenge the player

I'll hold my hand up - have booed him in the past but these days am getting behind all the players, they need it

It wasn't. He just laid down.

possibly voluntary tackle then?

If the rule was taken as they are written it should have been a voluntary tackle.

That's exactly what I thought.

He was either not held - in which case lying there was a clear opportunity for one player to legally pick him up.

or,

he gave up the tackle, and prior to Platt picking him up, he should have been penalised as you rightly point out for a voluntary tackle.

Definate voluntary tackle. It should have been our penalty or at least our scrum. Another one of Bentham's obscure decisions.

Tackle rules for those who don't seem to know them.

11.2) A player in possession is tackled:

a) When he is held by one or more opposing players and the ball or the hand or arm holding the ball comes into contact with the ground.
b) When he is held by one or more opposing players in such a manner that he can make no further progress and cannot part with the ball.
c) When, being held by an opponent, the tackled player makes it evident that he has succumbed to the tackle and wishes to be released in order to play-the-ball.
d) When he is lying on the ground and an opponent places a hand on him.

11.3) Once a player in possession has been tackled it is illegal for any player to move or try to move him from the point where the tackle is effected.

I think in this situation 11.2) d) and 11.3) say it all.

Voluntary tackle rules?

It wasn't a voluntary tackle.
For it to be classed as a voluntary, Hodgson would have had to go down to the floor, get up and then play the ball without a bulls player laying a finger on him.
Brett was still on the floor when Platt picked him up and threw him over the line. Had he left him to get up and play it, then yes it would have been a voluntary.

Hope that helped.