Konrad, Kahu and the kick

[Meth]

How do you see this one?

Obviously, it's a fine line. He can't kick at the ball. But he can lodge his feet underneath the ball. The refs ruled that he deliberately sought to do the former, not the latter. How do you judge that?

If he was seeking to lodge his feet underneath the ball and in the process of doing so, due to timing and not intent, kicked the ball out of Kahu's grasp, is that still a penalty try?

 

[muzby]

I'm glad someone started a thread on last night's game. I've been waiting for a chance to discuss it.

 

[Meth]

I'm glad someone started a thread on last night's game. I've been waiting for a chance to discuss it.

On a specific incident and a specific rule arising from last night's game.

This is a Rugby League forum, yeah 'staff member'?

 

[Shorty]

At the time I thought it was the first of many crap calls but I think this one was correct.
It was at least a penalty.

That being said would they award that every day of the week?

 

[Meth]

At the time I thought it was the first of many crap calls but I think this one was correct.
It was at least a penalty.

That being said would they award that every day of the week?

Is the difference between penalty and penalty try intent?

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I always look at the motive for the rule. The rule was supposedly brought in because people whinged when slater was kicking people in the head trying to kick the ball out. It's basically the old kicking in danger rule modified by a reactionary NRL and ruled on by idiots. But even then there was no danger at all and the defender should be able to prevent the try in any way that is not dangerous. That's what he did. It's what any player would do. You can rake the ball out over the line these days and it's only a drop out. At worst it should be the same here.

 

[Bretto]

Correct decision. He deliberately kicked at the ball, which you cannot do. Easy.

 

[Meth]

Correct decision. He deliberately kicked at the ball, which you cannot do. Easy.

How do you know?

 

[Card Shark]

If he was seeking to lodge his feet underneath the ball and in the process of doing so, due to timing and not intent, kicked the ball out of Kahu's grasp, is that still a penalty try?

I agree, he tried to get under the ball., was fractionally slow in doing so.

 

[Shorty]

Is the difference between penalty and penalty try intent?

Well yes and they are 100% sure that Kahu would have scored it without Hurrell there.

I thought he tried to position his legs so that it would keep Kahu from actually grounding the ball.
Hurrell's feet and Kahu's head were nowhere near each other.
They need to clarify this rule a bit more.

 

[Edwahu]

I thought it was a try but the bar is so high to give a penalty try I doubt it would be given most of the time.

 

[Meth]

Well yes and they are 100% sure that Kahu would have scored it without Hurrell there.

I thought he tried to position his legs so that it would keep Kahu from actually grounding the ball.
Hurrell's feet and Kahu's head were nowhere near each other.
They need to clarify this rule a bit more.

Definitely a minefield.

Isn't it '100% sure Kahu would have scored without Hurrell's foul play'?

If Hurrell inadvertently knocked the ball out of Kahu's grasp while trying to lodge his feet under the ball to stop a try, is it still a penalty try?

 

[drago brelli]

The ref got that one one correct. The real concern is the Gould doesn't know the rule and he runs Penrith.

 

[myrrh ken]

Agree. Rightly or wrongly the game has moved on to rub out any hint of Matthew ridge / billy slater head kicking

 

[lockyno1]

It was either a penalty try or 10 in the bin. My view is Kahu would have scored if he wasn't illegally infringed so therefore it's a penalty try.

 

[lockyno1]

How do you know?

What do you think he was doing? If he wasn't deliberately kicking at Kahu what was he doing?

 

[The Mad Hatter]

At the time I thought it was the first of many crap calls but I think this one was correct.
It was at least a penalty.

That being said would they award that every day of the week?

They wouldn't have even awarded it to the Titans last night.

 

[Meth]

What do you think he was doing? If he wasn't deliberately kicking at Kahu what was he doing?

He might have been trying to get his feet under the ball.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

What do you think he was doing? If he wasn't deliberately kicking at Kahu what was he doing?

Cramp?

 

[lockyno1]

He might have been trying to get his feet under the ball.

Pigs fly too. You don't use a kicking motion to put your legs under the ball.

I would say the same thing if Brisbane were defending. I'm so over players illegally infringing on the line to stop tries.

My only issue about this is that it took until the finals. There have been half a dozen penalty tries that should have been awarded this season