1999 said:
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]from sportal.co.nz
...However, the Warriors profited from another blue by the match officials which resulted in the try that gave them their 24-20 victory. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]With just seven minutes left in the game, a Storm player kicked the ball close to the Warriors line and directly at the face of winger Manu Vatuvei, who raised his hands to protect his face or deflect the ball. [/FONT]
spac_writeAd("/site=s/area=s.stuff.sport.league/aamsz=300x250/ch=");
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]A touch judge thought Vatuvei did not deliberately play at the ball and the Warriors were granted possession, but the review indicated Vatuvei's hand appeared to follow the flight of the ball and push it upwards and into touch. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]The committee decided after reviewing a third angle replayed from behind the goal line that Vatuvei played at the ball. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]From the resultant possession, Vatuvei charged down the left flank before passing to Webb to score.
hmmmm, although we still might not have won the game, it certainly cost us a shot at it, although after that matt king blunder, i really thought we threw our chance away, interesting though...[/FONT]
Its actually from stuff.co.nz and here is the full article:
Webb should have received benefit of doubt
22 August 2006
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
SYDNEY: Brent Webb should been given the benefit of the doubt when he was denied a spectacular try for the New Zealand Warriors last Saturday, the National Rugby League's match review committee said today.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
Following up a Grant Rovelli grubber kick into the Melbourne Storm's goal area in the first half, Webb dived just before the ball reached the dead ball line, appearing to touch it down ahead of the Storm defenders. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
But when referee Tony Archer referred to video official Phil Cooley for his opinion, the Warriors were denied a try because of Cooley's view the ball was not properly grounded. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
The match review committee said one camera angle showed Webb grounding the ball, but a reverse angle, while obscured, suggested Webb's hand may have come away from the ball. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
"Benefit of the doubt should have been considered," the committee said. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
However, the Warriors profited from another blue by the match officials which resulted in the try that gave them their 24-20 victory. [/FONT]
However, the Warriors profited from another blue by the match officials which resulted in the try that gave them their 24-20 victory.
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
With just seven minutes left in the game, a Storm player kicked the ball close to the Warriors line and directly at the face of winger Manu Vatuvei, who raised his hands to protect his face or deflect the ball. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
A touch judge thought Vatuvei did not deliberately play at the ball and the Warriors were granted possession, but the review indicated Vatuvei's hand appeared to follow the flight of the ball and push it upwards and into touch. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
The committee decided after reviewing a third angle replayed from behind the goal line that Vatuvei played at the ball. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, MS Sans Serif]
From the resultant possession, Vatuvei charged down the left flank before passing to Webb to score. [/FONT]
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3772918a10713,00.html
(Btw 1999, that's how you source articles)
As you can see, there are two different versions to this article:
1. The full version.
2. Your version.
Your version has selectively sliced out the headline incident thereby denying the balance - I'm sure it was the author's intention to have a balanced report. So the title of this thread is not backed up the article you selected.
As they say in the classics... sprung! ;-)
