Generally his kicking game and defence were good and I agree that there's too much pressure on his shoulders.

Smith has been consitently good this season and has improved his game steadily, being a key cog means he will get that scrutinty and criticism all the time (unfortunately). I'm not 100% sure who decided on the 3rd tackle kick - I'd expect the coaches/Snr players would have discussed this in the break at full time? TBH, not the worst idea but just didn't work out. Last time we were in GP we knocked on, so try something different?

Good to see some support and recognition for Smith on these pages. Yes he messed up in extra time, but at half any mistake is magnified.

One other thing I couldn't understand is why Faz and Brad O'Neill were the ones closing down Schneider before the winning drop kick. We have two of the quickest in Field and French and on the previous drop goal attempt Schneider couldn't get the kick away as Field was on him in a flash.

I thought the charge down was a 50/50 personally. He’s running towards the player but he turns away and I think it just comes off his leg. It’s one of those where someone’s gonna feel hard done to either way. I’m not sure what the letter of the law is for a deliberate charge down to reset the tackle count, but I didn’t think he actually made a play for the ball when I watched it.

That's an interesting point - I assumed it would have to be a charge down as the arms were up with the intent to block the ball. But maybe it wasn't given as it hit the legs rather than the arms - I'm not sure on the rule.

You've misunderstood what a charge down is. If the player moves towards the kicker with arms up it's a charge down irrespective of where it hits or whether he turns his head.

It was a charge down. The ref got it wrong.

I don’t think that’s right. You see it all the time as well when it hits a player and goes out of play and they deem it not played at. You also see it plenty of times when someone kicks on the last and it hits someone and the ref waves play on. I think it has to be played at to constitute a charge down and I don’t think moving toward the kicker is sufficient for that. Like I said I’m not sure of the letter of the law, so maybe raising his arms is enough for that, but by my understanding you have to make a play towards the ball (not the player)

What about jumping 4 ft off the floor with your arms in the air? Is that a charge down?

He didn’t jump though lol

Quote ="The Reaper"He didn’t jump though lol'" You sure? https://www.instagram.com/p/CvDuG2DKWWq/?hl=en

Quote ="The Reaper"He didn’t jump though lol'" You sure? https://www.instagram.com/p/CvDuG2DKWWq/?hl=en

Mate, you've already admitted you don't understand the rule. If you've convinced yourself that's not a charge down, then enjoy your delusion.

Quote ="Egg Chasing"You sure? https://www.instagram.com/p/CvDuG2DKWWq/?hl=en'" Good grief! Hadn't seen that before. Just shows how people can convince themselves of anything if they want to believe it enough.

Quote ="Egg Chasing"You sure? https://www.instagram.com/p/CvDuG2DKWWq/?hl=en'" Good grief! Hadn't seen that before. Just shows how people can convince themselves of anything if they want to believe it enough.

The only delusion here is yours mate. That it wasn’t a charge down is a fact, as it wasn’t given as one.

thats like saying none of the tackles asiata put in against leigh were foul play.....they werent given as one

And the MRP didn’t either so unfortunately, yes, this is bizarrely a fact at this moment in time. Hopefully common sense will prevail and it won’t be for much longer

So there's no such thing as an incorrect decision in your world? Interesting. I look forward to your support of all decisions that go against your team too in that case.

I won't hold my breath...

Whilst you may believe it was a charge down, and I do too FWIW, the simple fact is it wasn’t as it wasn’t given.

Even so, we had plenty of opportunities to put KR to bed in that game but made some bizarre attacking choices. I’m not saying you’re hanging the loss on the chargedown like some are but that’s a bit of a cop out. We had our chances and we blew them.

Mate, it wasn't RULED as a charge down by the referee on the day. That doesn't mean it wasn't one. The two things aren't interchangeable. An error of judgement doesn't magically change reality. That is saying no decision is ever incorrect which is simply not true.

If you believe that any error is made correct by the ruling at the time, how do you explain overturned convictions for example? We'd still have innocent people languishing in jail if we believed that theory. Luckily the world at large doesn't. The fact that you do still doesn't make it correct.

Mate that’s like comparing apples and tomatoes because they’re the same shape. It wasn’t a chargedown because the referee didn’t give it and that decision is irreversible. A wrongful conviction at court is reversible.

Even so, using that as an excuse - which I’m not suggesting you are by the way - is straw grabbing.

The death penalty isn't reversible. Doesn't mean that they don't get them wrong as history clearly shows.

Anyway, aren't you being a bit hypocritical here? If you believe that whether something is irreversible is the defining factor on whether something is right or wrong, why are you even on a forum discussing things you can't change? When you say "the coaching staff got X or Y wrong" (sic), they defacto can't have done as it's irreversible.

The fact that it was RULED as not a charge down doesn't preclude it from being the wrong decision. The 2 aren't mutually exclusive.

Again, comparing apples and tomatoes here. The irony is we both agree and disagree at the same time

Only in your opinion mate. Given that no two examples can be, by definition, exactly the same I reckon they stand comparison. There are enough similarities to show principle. I would similarly argue that your points of difference are purely pedantic rather than having any real insight. It's all a matter of opinion.

I think we agree that it was a charge down as you've already said as much

Fair enough

The rules:

Charging Down is blocking the path of the ball with hands, arm or body as it rises from an opponent's kick.

Phuzzy is correct.