What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2020: NRL 360

Gazzamatta

Coach
Messages
14,144
4 Refs dropped from this game. Maybe they should have been congratulated for getting the most important decision correct?
 

golfer

Juniors
Messages
84
Were the 4 the 2 on the field and the 2 in the bunker or was it the 2 on the field and the 2 touch judges.
I have just got my answer from the NRL website, it is the 4 on field officials. Annesley also states that Sivo's try was from a knock on, but the example shows that Brown passes the ball backwards and Green hits it towards the try line. The try was referred to the video referee who stated that Green hits the ball towards the tryline. Although Annesley disagrees with this decision he did not sack the video referee.
 

emjaycee

Coach
Messages
12,868
I have just got my answer from the NRL website, it is the 4 on field officials. Annesley also states that Sivo's try was from a knock on, but the example shows that Brown passes the ball backwards and Green hits it towards the try line. The try was referred to the video referee who stated that Green hits the ball towards the tryline. Although Annesley disagrees with this decision he did not sack the video referee.
Annesley's comment was that AFTER Green hit it, the ball then hit Drown on the thumb and continued to progress towards the Warriors goal-line, thus Drown actually knocked it on after Green knocked it back. He did state though that in the time the on-field refs and bunker had to make a decision, with the camera angles available, they would not have seen the minuscule touch from Drown and so that had no bearing on their sacking. He seemed more concerned with the 2 incorrect stripping decisions which both happened to favour the Eels and the Sivo try/no-try

Interestingly he continued to say that these decisions (all 5 he commented on) while not guaranteeing a Warriors win, had a bearing on the outcome of the game. It seemed to me that his whole review was an attempt to placate an upset Warriors organisation who needed the 2 points to stay in touch with the 8.
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,603
Annesley's comment was that AFTER Green hit it, the ball then hit Drown on the thumb and continued to progress towards the Warriors goal-line, thus Drown actually knocked it on after Green knocked it back. He did state though that in the time the on-field refs and bunker had to make a decision, with the camera angles available, they would not have seen the minuscule touch from Drown and so that had no bearing on their sacking. He seemed more concerned with the 2 incorrect stripping decisions which both happened to favour the Eels and the Sivo try/no-try

Interestingly he continued to say that these decisions (all 5 he commented on) while not guaranteeing a Warriors win, had a bearing on the outcome of the game. It seemed to me that his whole review was an attempt to placate an upset Warriors organisation who needed the 2 points to stay in touch with the 8.
so this ridiculous f**kin ass f**k of a stripping rule has already cost 4 people their jobs

how many more lives will have to be thrown into turmoil before the NRL admits to their enormous f**king stupidity?
 

emjaycee

Coach
Messages
12,868
so this ridiculous f**kin ass f**k of a stripping rule has already cost 4 people their jobs

how many more lives will have to be thrown into turmoil before the NRL admits to their enormous f**king stupidity?
How many members do the Eels have again?
 

golfer

Juniors
Messages
84
Some on here have two.
I agree that the striping rule is a joke. The player in possession has very little chance if one or two players are tugging at his arms and the third is grappling for the ball. Once the player trying to reef the ball has both arms around the ball he somehow singles the other two to let go, this gives the player in possession little chance of holding the ball.
 

golfer

Juniors
Messages
84
Annesley's comment was that AFTER Green hit it, the ball then hit Drown on the thumb and continued to progress towards the Warriors goal-line, thus Drown actually knocked it on after Green knocked it back. He did state though that in the time the on-field refs and bunker had to make a decision, with the camera angles available, they would not have seen the minuscule touch from Drown and so that had no bearing on their sacking. He seemed more concerned with the 2 incorrect stripping decisions which both happened to favour the Eels and the Sivo try/no-try

Interestingly he continued to say that these decisions (all 5 he commented on) while not guaranteeing a Warriors win, had a bearing on the outcome of the game. It seemed to me that his whole review was an attempt to placate an upset Warriors organisation who needed the 2 points to stay in touch with the 8.
If they made a ruling on the camera angles available at the time the decision should stand.
 

Parra Cheeses

Juniors
Messages
516
I agree that the striping rule is a joke. The player in possession has very little chance if one or two players are tugging at his arms and the third is grappling for the ball. Once the player trying to reef the ball has both arms around the ball he somehow singles the other two to let go, this gives the player in possession little chance of holding the ball.
Agreed sh!those rule. The NRL need to own it and P!ss it off.
 

Happy MEel

First Grade
Messages
9,377
Annesley's comment was that AFTER Green hit it, the ball then hit Drown on the thumb and continued to progress towards the Warriors goal-line, thus Drown actually knocked it on after Green knocked it back. He did state though that in the time the on-field refs and bunker had to make a decision, with the camera angles available, they would not have seen the minuscule touch from Drown and so that had no bearing on their sacking. He seemed more concerned with the 2 incorrect stripping decisions which both happened to favour the Eels and the Sivo try/no-try

Interestingly he continued to say that these decisions (all 5 he commented on) while not guaranteeing a Warriors win, had a bearing on the outcome of the game. It seemed to me that his whole review was an attempt to placate an upset Warriors organisation who needed the 2 points to stay in touch with the 8.
Yep, very little attention is being given to the blatant knock on from the Warriors which led to a try the following set.
 

Avenger

Immortal
Messages
32,021
Just watching NRL360 for the first time in weeks. Kent and Crawley are neck and neck as the biggest f**kwits in the game. The tough talk discussing the Titans situation and the continual masturbation over the Roosters and Storm is just so f**king annoying.
 
Messages
42,876
Just watching NRL360 for the first time in weeks. Kent and Crawley are neck and neck as the biggest f**kwits in the game. The tough talk discussing the Titans situation and the continual masturbation over the Roosters and Storm is just so f**king annoying.
I was watching that. Kent getting worked up about nothing again. Mostly I find it pretty funny.
 
Top