Search results

Nothing announced?

I know grief is complex but 12:49am is a ridiculous time to be contemplating what next after the death of the NRC 5 years ago

Can't see why they would. Would involve respecting their fans and all that

Reds trying their best to appease both the fans and RA by starting Lynagh both at 10 and on the bench simultaneously

Agree - but the same argument could be made about not bending at the hips in contact, or tucking your arm by your side. We have the "tackle school"/ coaching intervention so at least it is consistently applied.

Sure, but the other side of the coin is this way we get consistent sentencing for all dangerous tackles There was an article about Hunter Paisami doing "tackle school" a while back and it said the content of the lesson was he had to watch the clip of the incident, identify what he did wrong and...

Pretty standard procedure that players get to undertake tackle school to reduce suspensions.

Never admit defeat, attack attack attack.

This really depends on what your benchmark is honestly. Any network/ producer would take a 30% YOY increase when the overall audience of FTA TV is down ~10% YOY. I agree that FTA TV for super rugby was never going to be a realistic saving grace for the game. The NRL and AFL have a firm...

It could be C? They do work closely with some Data Analysis academics at QUT and maybe there is a bit of moneyball going on as you and @chiraag suggest. Interesting thoughts honestly.

Feels like penalty goals would better align with "he gets on base" honestly

I wouldn't be so sure. With their balls firmly in the tight silverlake grip for the foreseeable future and us about to host a BIL series and 2 world cup - our path looks better - even without a RSA tour

I haven't seen it, and I don't care enough to go back and watch it. I agree it's probably a non issue from what I know about how the shows topics week to week are generally discussed. But to me it's less about declaring conflicts of interest, and more the undertone of the editorial decision to...

It probably depends on how it's being framed in the moment. Are they asking for his expert opinion or just throwing it up as a general discussion point for the group? It probably doesn't harm the show to acknowledge in the moment that he is her manager either way though.

Fortunately, the foreword of the law book gives us some clarity for situations like this:

It might appear that way, but there is more nuance. This is the law In practice: Lift above horizontal, lands on side/ lower back - YC Lift above horizontal, lands on shoulder/ neck head - RC A lifting tackle that doesn't meet that criteria above but is still awkward/ dangerous for those...

A tackle can only occur within the field of play, once it moves in-goal you have different laws applying.

To me it looks like there is a little tug.

This is the closest we get. Though 13. Players on the Ground in open play - make it less clear if this is legal. I think you have to determine whether Madi is allowed to play at the ball when she's off her feet / or whether she even plays at the ball at all (kinda looks like the NZ player...

How about I try the right thread: One for the nuffies. 7s overnight, Madi Levi makes an incredible try saver - you can see it here: Is it legal though? Why/ why not? Clear release, playing the ball off feet?