Bill Harrigan

[Bazal]

Penalty Try was the correct decision IMO. When penalty tries aren't given, there is controversy, people complain about no penalty tries etc. When one is give, people complain, you can never be certain blah blah blah. Sure, that's where the Percy Montgomery award comes into play. You can never be sure. But did a professional foul remove any chance of the attacking team from scoring? Sure did. If Robinson held off for half a second, he was ok, but he knew what he was doing tackling the dude without the ball. Bill got it right.

The issue for mine is that if Chad holds off for that split second, Witt doesn't score. He gets tackled short...So how can that be given a penalty try? Maybe if Chad tackles him in the same manner on the tryline, but as it was momentum stopped him short anyway...that is not a penalty try. My other concern is Hollywood Harrigans reasoning for the decision, as far as I know that is not written anywhere in the rule book

 

[innsaneink]

Where did Witt end up when the momentum had stopped?

Iirc it was about 2 or 3m short of the line.....

Would he have reached the line if Hindmarsh had waited a split second until he got the ball before tackling him?
Thats the only question the VR should ask himself.

 

[supersoniceagle]

Geez, if you are certain of a penalty try you award it. Whether that is in the 1st minute or the 79th. If you are 95% sure of a penalty try you don't award it, whether it is in the 1st minute or 79th. The amount of time left in the game is irrelevant. If you can't comprehend that, best of luck to you.

I understand what u guys are saying, and u are correct that the rule can't change based on the time. I guess what I'm saying is that I think a penalty try should be given in ALL cases such as the one we saw tonight. (but going by the current rule it was clearly no penalty try and I have no idea how he came up with that conclusion)

 

[thehattrickrabbit]

Penalty Try was the correct decision IMO. When penalty tries aren't given, there is controversy, people complain about no penalty tries etc. When one is give, people complain, you can never be certain blah blah blah. Sure, that's where the Percy Montgomery award comes into play. You can never be sure. But did a professional foul remove any chance of the attacking team from scoring? Sure did. If Robinson held off for half a second, he was ok, but he knew what he was doing tackling the dude without the ball. Bill got it right.

Bill Harrigan ruled benefit of the doubt penalty try, in my humble opinion, now if Robinson didnt interfere, the dew on the ground probably would of seen Witt have enough Momentum through the law of physics, the only possible thing that could be debateable in this call, is whether Witt would of grounded the ball had he got to the line, catching the ball was fine, because he caught it even when he was taken out before.

I am happy with the call.

 

[Bazal]

Bill Harrigan ruled benefit of the doubt penalty try, in my humble opinion, now if Robinson didnt interfere, the dew on the ground probably would of seen Witt have enough Momentum through the law of physics, the only possible thing that could be debateable in this call, is whether Witt would of grounded the ball had he got to the line, catching the ball was fine, because he caught it even when he was taken out before.

I am happy with the call.

If momentum would have carried him over, why was he tackled short of the line?

 

[Glen]

The precedent has been set earlier this year with PJ Marsh. If they couldn't be certain PJ would have scored that one, they could never be certain of anything. But of course, Bill does what Bill wants and he never misses a chance to create a talking point

 

[thehattrickrabbit]

If momentum would have carried him over, why was he tackled short of the line?

because he was tackled before he should of been, so he didnt get a chance to hit up and create some go forward from the pass, which would of seen him go over the line.

 

[Misty Bee]

Crap penalty.

Firstly, Witt juggled the ball, and dropped it. Robbo was around the abdomen, the ball hit Witt on the shoulder simultaneously.

Secondly, as has been mentioned, witt never made it in goal.

Finally, Bill harrigan has obviously never met Max Mannix, or the Bronco from last week.

 

[Bazal]

because he was tackled before he should of been, so he didnt get a chance to hit up and create some go forward from the pass, which would of seen him go over the line.

He would have gone maybe one more step had Robbo not taken him out...He wouldn't have made it. Chad was early but not ludicrously so...

 

[Eelectrica]

Bill Harrigan ruled benefit of the doubt penalty try, in my humble opinion, now if Robinson didnt interfere, the dew on the ground probably would of seen Witt have enough Momentum through the law of physics, the only possible thing that could be debateable in this call, is whether Witt would of grounded the ball had he got to the line, catching the ball was fine, because he caught it even when he was taken out before.

I am happy with the call.

Benefit of doubt penalty try?:?
When awarding a penalty try their's not supposed to be any doubt at all. :crazy:
Therefore a benefit of doubt penalty try is impossible ](*,)

 

[Ron Jeremy]

there was more doubt he wouldn't of scored it!! Chad should've been binned for it but no penalty try!

 

[Tekken Lord]

He was tackled a fraction of a second early and ended up 2/3m short of the line, how anybody could give that a penalty try i don't know. If Robinson had been a fraction of a second later does witt score? No, ridiculous decision

 

[RalthFilthy]

I've seen heaps of these that didn't end up penalty tries because the referees themselves have said they have to be 100% certain of a try coming out of it, Witt wasn't a 100% certainty.
Although I didn't think it was a penalty try, I did think it was a professional foul and Robinson should of had 10 in the bin. When they decided to award a penalty try shouldn't he have have been put in the bin as well?

 

[thehattrickrabbit]

He was tackled a fraction of a second early and ended up 2/3m short of the line, how anybody could give that a penalty try i don't know. If Robinson had been a fraction of a second later does witt score? No, ridiculous decision

do you know that for sure ???, no one can know for sure, Hence Benefit of The Doubt.

It may not be in the rules, but it was a legit call imo

 

[Bazal]

do you know that for sure ???, no one can know for sure, Hence Benefit of The Doubt.

It may not be in the rules, but it was a legit call imo

Benefit of the Doubt does not apply to a penalty try

 

[El Diablo]

there is no benefit of the doubt in penalty tries

 

[innsaneink]

Crap penalty.

Firstly, Witt juggled the ball, and dropped it. Robbo was around the abdomen, the ball hit Witt on the shoulder simultaneously.

Secondly, as has been mentioned, witt never made it in goal.

Finally, Bill harrigan has obviously never met Max Mannix, or the Bronco from last week.

I'll say it again.....incidentals such as possible dropped balls, held ups etc dont come into it.
Only the basics do...or are supposed to.

 

[thehattrickrabbit]

Benefit of the Doubt does not apply to a penalty try

well it should.

Ultimately, I dont even think Harrigan could of been 100% sure he would of scored, so either he pressed the wrong button, or he is thinking the same frame of mind as me.

But I think Benefit of The Doubt Penalty Tries should be legit, 6 points max.

If you can be 100% certain that a player would of scored if an infringement didnt happen, an 8 point Penalty Try should be awarded, given a kick from right in front, its a minimum of 6 points, an a chance at an extra 2.

 

[Bazal]

Tbh the whole benefit of the doubt rule is a catastrophe...but that's a subject for another day. Fact is Bill himself gave an explanation not backed up by any current rules...he got the decision wrong.

 

[thehattrickrabbit]

Tbh the whole benefit of the doubt rule is a catastrophe...but that's a subject for another day. Fact is Bill himself gave an explanation not backed up by any current rules...he got the decision wrong.

I agree with that, but im happy for it to be awarded.