Beau Scott/Matt Prior - try/no try

[SET2JT]

I don't need to consult a rule book to support my theory that you can not pass the ball while held, you're a dragons fan, we get it, your bullshit is just par for the course.

:lol: without the rule book you have no game. I like to see how your theory goes in court without reference's from the rule book. I'm sure the judge will believe you.

 

[God-King Dean]

I don't need to consult a rule book to support my theory that you can not pass the ball while held, you're a dragons fan, we get it, your bullshit is just par for the course.

That's my philosophy with murder.

 

[kurt faulk]

It was clearly a try by the rules. Even the 9 commentators clearly weren't aware of the rule.

the 9 commentators don't know their heads from their arseholes.

i love how they were still sulking about it after the game. numbskulls.

.

 

[Mayor West]

Definitely grounded it though, have another look if you're not sure.

Fair enough, I've only seen the replays at the ground but i was pretty sure there was seperation....Maybe not.

I would just like to see a player do what Scott did in a different area of the field. To me there is no way he gets away with that in his own in goal where the ref doesn't have the back up option of the video ref.

Also people saying the ref hadn't called held, watch a whole game of footy and see how many times the ref actually has to call held. Generally only does it when a man is upright in a tackle, being driven back or going near the touchline. After the incident i started watching players just take a basic hit up and see if there arm hits the ground and it doesn't happen all the time. The ref doesn't call held generally so can they just offload after all there momentum has stopped and they are flat on there back?

 

[Rodent]

You are still allowed to pass the ball when flat on your back, progress stopped and defenders hanging on to you, as long as you have not succumbed in the tackle and the ball or arm carrying the ball hasn't touched the ground (and the ref hasn't called held).
Why are the ignorami continuing to say his momentum was stopped? Why do they say he was held? Maybe you would like to see a rule change but don't whinge that the refs got it wrong. They clearly knew the rules and adjudicated correctly.

 

[Geohood]

We'll start seeing players aim to spin onto their back during a tackle, try and keep their arms off the ground and offload union style now.

 

[Azkatro]

Refs calling 'held' has been a rule for as long as anyone can recall...certainly me.
Take that out and you have mayhem.
The ref calling held or not is the crux of the issue here...clearly he did not = play on = try!

So.. why did it go to the video ref? What was the referee unsure about?

 

[Rodent]

Also people saying the ref hadn't called held, watch a whole game of footy and see how many times the ref actually has to call held. Generally only does it when a man is upright in a tackle, being driven back or going near the touchline. After the incident i started watching players just take a basic hit up and see if there arm hits the ground and it doesn't happen all the time. The ref doesn't call held generally so can they just offload after all there momentum has stopped and they are flat on there back?

The rules allow for this. If in the opinion of the ref you have succumbed to a tackle, it is said to be complete. If you are put on your back you would have very little time to offload for it to be legal. If as in Scott's case you never succumbed and were desperately trying to offload and you do so immediately after hitting the deck, the rules state it's ok.

 

[thommo4pm]

LOL...forget the photo...they dont freeze once they hit the deck, there was still momentum

Spot on, watch it in normal speed, and you'll see Scott was still being driven backwards by Keatings tackle.
The slow motion replay never does it justice.

 

[Rodent]

So.. why did it go to the video ref? What was the referee unsure about?

He was unsure about the grounding

 

[chrisD]

:lol: without the rule book you have no game. I like to see how your theory goes in court without reference's from the rule book. I'm sure the judge will believe you.

I'm fairly confident my theory that you can't pass when held isn't going to need to be explained. So just so we're clear here, you're claiming when a player is held they may pass the ball? Really? That's what your dumb ass is arguing?

That's my philosophy with murder.

Mine too, I don't nee to consult the code of laws to know that murder is illegal. Glad we can all agree.

 

[thommo4pm]

Not when you're clearly held, but it's cool, double dragon standards isn't a big deal anymore.

Oh well, I guess it gives the Dogs another chance for "'payback time" next time we play them hey.

Have to laugh at them still using the 2009 game at Kogarah, before the game on the big screen, and stating it's payback time.
How many times have we played now since that match?

 

[thommo4pm]

I'm fairly confident my theory that you can't pass when held isn't going to need to be explained. So just so we're clear here, you're claiming when a player is held they may pass the ball? Really? That's what your dumb ass is arguing?



Mine too, I don't nee to consult the code of laws to know that murder is illegal. Glad we can all agree.

Have you watched it again in normal speed, without your Dragon hating glasses on? Can you honestly tell me Beau Scott had completely stopped in that tackle, before Matt Prior started taking the ball?

 

[chrisD]

Have you watched it again in normal speed, without your Dragon hating glasses on? Can you honestly tell me Beau Scott had completely stopped in that tackle, before Matt Prior started taking the ball?

Hang on, we'll get to that, for now I'm arguing with the dumb shits attempting to belittle me for saying you can't pass the ball when held, God King and set2j.

 

[Timmah]

Speed of a replay has no bearing ffs. He was tackled and passed the ball off the ground.

 

[thommo4pm]

Speed of a replay has no bearing ffs. He was tackled and passed the ball off the ground.

As I have said, watch it in normal speed and tell me honestly if you think all momentum had gone from the tackle before Prior gets the ball.
Scott was still being tackled backwards, his arms had not touched the ground, and the tackle was still being completed.

It's a non-issue.

Fact is, whatever any of us say now is irrelevant, it's on the scoreboard and the result was 15-10.

 

[thommo4pm]

Hang on, we'll get to that, for now I'm arguing with the dumb shits attempting to belittle me for saying you can't pass the ball when held, God King and set2j.

If he was completely held I would totally agree with you.

 

[chrisD]

If he was completely held I would totally agree with you.

There's different degrees of held now? Perhaps held and Dragons held?

 

[thommo4pm]

There's different degrees of held now? Perhaps held and Dragons held?

As I have pointed out 3 or 4 times now, the momentum of the tackle was not completed when Prior started taking the ball. He was not held.
If you are going by a freeze frame photo somebody else posted then that it laughable.

Again, watch it in normal speed and tell me if you honestly think all momentum in that tackle was gone before Prior started taking the ball.
Just because he had hit the ground means he is tackled now does it?

 

[BDGS]

imo, looking on it on replay, arm carrying the ball never hit the ground so try.

Does that mean each time a tackle player doesn't get put to the ground he may pass instead of playing the ball?