Crocker's Try

[jimmythehand]

Wow what a night! Not only did the Dogs hammer the Roosters, but to see Justin Hodges sent off and Crocker on report really put the icing on the cake. Thugs, that's all they are. Can't wait for Morley to be thrown out of the NRL just like Craig Smith was because of a poor technique. The only thing the game really lacked was Hodges running backwards, losing ten metres and getting hammered - that always makes me laugh too.

What do you all think of Crocker's try? The way I saw, the arm carrying the ball clearly hit the ground, and he promoted the football to score the try. That to me is a double movement, and the reason it was missed was because the arm was off the ground before he started the promotion of the football.

Not that it matters with the result, but it's always nice to be clear on the rules. How did you see it?

 

[xwizit]

you won the game, by a big margin at that, and you still argue the point??


go figure :roll:

 

[Hoggy]

It was a fair try, simple as that.

 

[innsaneink]

Double movement????? :lol: :lol: :lol:
His whole body was in the f****g in-goal if I remember rightly.
Fair try whatever occurred.

 

[chooky]

I can't understand Bulldogs supporters calling the roosters thugs?! they have short memories!

 

[jimmythehand]

you won the game, by a big margin at that, and you still argue the point??


go figure

Read the fine print xtwit!

 

[xwizit]

you won the game, by a big margin at that, and you still argue the point??


go figure

Read the fine print xtwit!

i did but i dont see the point of the thread...ok, it can be, in your mind, 46-12


better? :roll:

 

[jimmythehand]

does anyone have anything technical to say about the try? If you're not interested in relating your comments to what the rules are then I'm not interested in what you have to say - please go and waste space on another thread.

I don't think there's any doubt that Crocker promoted the football to get the ball over the line. Was it a double movement because his arm had earlier hit the ground - or not a double movement because the promotion of the football didn't start with the arm on the ground? Another argument could be that he still had momentum so the promotion of the football was okay, but I think that had stopped too. Any intelligent comments?

 

[Hoggy]

Actually it would be 40-6.

 

[jimmythehand]

i did but i dont see the point of the thread...ok, it can be, in your mind, 46-12


better?

xtwit the fine print said i'm interested in clarity of the rules, so why would i care about the score. grow a brain.

 

[xwizit]

Actually it would be 40-6.

sorry brain explosion on my end

 

[Hoggy]

For Jimmy...

The momentum carried him over the line, you seem to be given an eternity to get the ball down when that is happened (take note of people that are held up and take a year to get it down but it is still called a try). There was no problem with the grounding in my view so all in all it was a fair try.

 

[jimmythehand]

I can't understand Bulldogs supporters calling the roosters thugs?! they have short memories!

sorry chooky, i should have said "on field thugs". Did you see hodges and walker pushing our guys in the face when they got up from the play the ball? On field thugs. And they got the penalty. Price rightly complained but Simpkins was too embarassed to pay attention to him.

 

[jimmythehand]

The momentum carried him over the line, you seem to be given an eternity to get the ball down when that is happened (take note of people that are held up and take a year to get it down but it is still called a try). There was no problem with the grounding in my view so all in all it was a fair try.

okay hoggy maybe there was still momentum, but I didn't see it that way. I see your point about people being held up and given an eternity to get the ball down - but this is really the crux of my argument. It wasn't a "held up" situation, because the arm carrying the ball had already hit the ground. Therefore if there was no momentum (which I thought), it should have been a double movement.

So either the video ref thought there was momentum and got it right, or missed the arm hitting the ground and got it wrong.

 

[Hoggy]

In my opinion there was still momentum. I'm tipping that's what Mander thought as well. 8)

 

[jimmythehand]

yep well I can't argue if that's the case

 

[innsaneink]

Didnt he end up upside down???
On top of the tackler sort of?
The momentum....if memeory serves me right...was when he was basically rolled over and then upside down, but his arm was still free, although awkward he could still get the ball down.

 

[MadDogMason]

Fair Try I Thought

 

[jimmythehand]

his arm was free, but it had already hit the ground and he had to promote the football to get it down

 

[Y2Eel]

jimmy he didnt premote the football forward he put it down the momentum hadn't stopped either so it was a fair try so buddy build a bridge and get overe it :mrgreen: