I don't understand the ist penalty decision. After the player went down Auckland nearly scored, ball cleared off the line. If theball had crossed for an Auckland goal it would have stood. Would that then have been considered playing advantage? I believe advantage had been played so no penalty should have been given.
Further.just to add that taking off a central defender at half time for whatever reason (no way to justify it) was one of the daftest decisions I have ever seen. See what happened later, we had NO central defenders for most of the second half. There was so much wrong with the way Nix played that someone should stand up and be counted.
The Nix did battle on extremely well and I did not think Auckland were as good as people SAY they are but I still feel Nix tactics were woeful at times, no fault at all of the players.
We really need a Coach.
Further.just to add that taking off a central defender at half time for whatever reason (no way to justify it) was one of the daftest decisions I have ever seen. See what happened later, we had NO central defenders for most of the second half. There was so much wrong with the way Nix played that someone should stand up and be counted.
The Nix did battle on extremely well and I did not think Auckland were as good as people SAY they are but I still feel Nix tactics were woeful at times, no fault at all of the players.
We really need a Coach.