09 :: R5 Sat :: Sharks 14 Raiders 24 @ Toyota

[VictorTheViking]

Ive just finished watching a replay I taped last night, a few things confused me. How can a ball that is lost sideways and not propelled forward be called a knockon??? (this happened to both sides I think), and the second being in the first half, where Flanagan apparently stripped the ball from douglas but replays showed there were no hands anywhere near the ball and he lost it himself.

I have to agree with your assessment of the advantage after seeing it again spider.

 

[mongoose]

I dont want to sound like a whinger but f**k me the reffing was suspect in that game. There was another confusing penalty against harrison i think for not standing at 2nd marker properly, but it was blown well after he made the next tackle. In fact the ball came loose in the following tackle and miller dived on it went to play the ball before the ref even blew the whistle. Even the commentators didn't have a clue what happened.

 

[Raider_69]

I have to agree with your assessment of the advantage after seeing it again spider.

I disagree, i know he didnt make many metres forward, but he picks the ball up, ran about 20 metres across field, then straighten up and for 10 metres, which left him about 2-3 metres in advance of the initial mistakes, essentially he covered about 20-30 metres of ground over about 10 seconds, he took the odds to it trying to create something out wide, he had taken the advantage.
Should have been a scrum feed to us 20 out from the line

there was some terrible calls last night against us, particularly some ordinary knock on calls and absurd crowd penalties. Im stoked we didnt drop our bundle like we usually do

 

[innsaneink]

Lozza daley was on fire

 

[legend]

He was but even Warren Smith said when it comes to the 50/50 calls, the Raiders rarely get the rub of the green.

 

[spider]

I disagree, i know he didnt make many metres forward, but he picks the ball up, ran about 20 metres across field, then straighten up and for 10 metres, which left him about 2-3 metres in advance of the initial mistakes,

i dont think you will find 'the advantage' as incorporating of what may have been created

either a player gained advantage or they didnt and your admission says he didnt gain advantage

he made a metre or two from the initial knock on - therefore no advantage received

 

[innsaneink]

He was but even Warren Smith said when it comes to the 50/50 calls, the Raiders rarely get the rub of the green.

Yeh fair enough, buit last nigt e was wrong approx 80% of the time.

"Im not too sure if that was actually a knock on"

One whinge carried on for an entire set of six.


Makes the kiwi boys look fairminded and liberal.

 

[gph]

i dont think you will find 'the advantage' as incorporating of what may have been created

either a player gained advantage or they didnt and your admission says he didnt gain advantage

he made a metre or two from the initial knock on - therefore no advantage received

I'd say he ran to the centre of the field, opening up both side, creating an advantage.

 

[spider]

creating an advantage.

so did he GAIN an advantage?

no matter how many times you watch the replay - the ref's decision wont change

 

[skeepe]

so did he GAIN an advantage?

no matter how many times you watch the replay - the ref's decision wont change

Yes he did. The advantage is played regardless of whether he runs sideways or forwards. If he ran straight back and dropped it I wouldn't have a problem with it but according to the laws of the game, he had taken his advantage.

It was one of several basic errors by the referees where the basic laws of the game were forgotten, such as the Simmons no try where the correct restart of play should have been a Raiders play the ball - as it was on the last tackle - and not the scrum that was awarded.

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

suspect calls on both sides.
that no try to simmons. surely we should have got the scrum. the raiders guy clearly knocked it on into us first.

in the end, we lost because we couldn't hold out tongue and flanagan under the freaking posts. lame.

 

[skeepe]

:lol:

Clearly? Get your eyes checked, Brown had his hands on it well before Purtell. You're giving Purtell way too much credit.

 

[Timmah]

You really can't be pleased eh? You won! Enjoy it! :lol:

 

[skeepe]

So because we won I should ignore the absolutely pathetic, woeful standard of refereeing and the multitude of ridiculous decisions that went against us YET AGAIN?

Who are you, Robert Finch?

 

[Inferno]

You really can't be pleased eh? You won! Enjoy it! :lol:

As for the game, Cronulla should be the next team investigated for having 14 players. Jason Robinson was absolutely atrocious in the second half with some of his decisions, and Gerard Sutton has NFI how to control 10m or players laying all over the tackled player.

Luckily we got home but those two gimps did us no favours today.

So all the commentators and even some Sharks fans who actually were surprised at THREE decisions that were blatantly incorrect and either cost the 'Dogs points or gave Sharks bogus opportunities... I just imagined them? Please :lol:

I'm complaining because we were robbed not once, not twice, but THRICE by two d!ckhead referees. That's up to 18 points... which could make a HUGE difference in Round 26 when the final positions are up for grabs. We should've been home comfortably long before we were, through little fault of our own.

I'm happy we won but I'm not happy with the standard of the officials. The use (or lack thereof) of the video referee has gone from the sublime to the ridiculous... too much last year to not enough this year. Rubbish stuff, and I don't want it costing my team or anyone else's a finals spot.

Perhaps you need a little of your own advice Timmah...

 

[typicalfan]

rose tinted glasses for Timmah :lol:, i need to get a pair.

 

[BWNB]

Perhaps you need a little of your own advice Timmah...

It only took a week Timmah!
Idiot!