Boyd's 54th Minute Try

[RufusRex]

no name .... rule 8.1 f was applied ... the ref did blow the whistle

 

[juanfarkall]

As a side note, Ryles should face a lengthy suspension for this.

 

[no name]

are you referring to the irregularity where the player closest to the ball , Scott Prince ran between the attacking player and the referee missed both and the fell over ?
or the irregularity where a player attacking the ball was unable to sidestep a slow moving referee who was moving backwards (and thus could not see where he was going) ?

Personally I believe that Prince's limp effort makes the "unjustifiable advantage" argument more than a little shakey as he was closer to the ball than anyone else and still missed it.

I am only speculating but judging from Prince's reaction he was moving to protect Zillman as he collected the ball. I think Zillman may have called that he had it.

Either way Dragons gained an unfair advantage from the ref getting in the way.

 

[SET2JT]

I am only speculating but judging from Prince's reaction he was moving to protect Zillman as he collected the ball. I think Zillman may have called that he had it.

Either way Dragons gained an unfair advantage from the ref getting in the way.

What do you think the correct call should have been? The Dragons made a long brake in that set and the Titans were on the ropes. Play the ball again, the Dragons would have been the ones disadvantaged as the Titans would have been able to set their line again for one tackle.

 

[juanfarkall]

I am only speculating but judging from Prince's reaction he was moving to protect Zillman as he collected the ball. I think Zillman may have called that he had it.

Either way Dragons gained an unfair advantage from the ref getting in the way.

But Prince was closer to the ball than Boyd.

Sounds like Prince f**ked up.

 

[no name]

What do you think the correct call should have been? The Dragons made a long brake in that set and the Titans were on the ropes. Play the ball again, the Dragons would have been the ones disadvantaged as the Titans would have been able to set their line again for one tackle.

Why should the Titans be disadvantaged when Zillman put himself in a position to field the ball?

Play the ball still would have disadvantaged them as Zillman would have more than likely cleaned it up but that's what should have happened.

And Prince didn't fuc up, he left it for his fullback, which is what you are taught at a young age

 

[j0nesy]

The Referee shall blow the whistle:
(f) when any irregularity, not provided for in these Laws, occurs and one team unjustifiably gains an advantage

No try.

He did blow the whistle... To call for the video ref.

Try.

 

[juanfarkall]

Why should the Titans be disadvantaged when Zillman put himself in a position to field the ball?

Play the ball still would have disadvantaged them as Zillman would have more than likely cleaned it up but that's what should have happened.

And Prince didn't fuc up, he left it for his fullback, which is what you are taught at a young age

If Zillman could not see the ref how could he possibly see a much smaller object like a football.

Never heard the "leave the ball for the fullback when you are much closer" theory before....

 

[Firey_Dragon]

I am only speculating but judging from Prince's reaction he was moving to protect Zillman as he collected the ball. I think Zillman may have called that he had it.

Either way Dragons gained an unfair advantage from the ref getting in the way.

Point of the matter is, Prince had a play at the ball but chose not to. Zillman was impeded without question, but Prince had an easy play at it.

The rulebook states that only an attacking team and the player carrying the ball can be impeded if there is a collision with a ref and a scrum called. If a defender collides with the ref it's fair game as long as the ball doesn't touch the ref, which it didn't.

Obviously the rule needs to be reviewed, it was a tough call on the titans but the correct one according to the rule book. The rule is in place because players would deliberately collide with a ref if they felt they couldn't make a play at the ball. One would like to think common sense would apply, but in this circumstance there was no ground within the rules to apply common sense.

It was an unlucky call, but it certainly isn't what cost the titans the game. Their inability to mount any pressure with their kicking game and handling errors is what inevitably cost them. It's a shame this ruling has tarnished what was otherwise a pretty impressive first round performance after a short turnaround from the WCC.

 

[Iafeta]

I don't think the real question is whether its a try or not, but what the hell the referee was doing in that position? That was really, really, really poor positioning from the referee. It was always eventually going to happen that when you add an extra referee you have a chance of the referee interfering at a crucial stage.

 

[Firey_Dragon]

I don't think the real question is whether its a try or not, but what the hell the referee was doing in that position? That was really, really, really poor positioning from the referee. It was always eventually going to happen that when you add an extra referee you have a chance of the referee interfering at a crucial stage.

Exactly. He should never have been in that position. He shouldn't be in first grade next week but we know that won't happen.

 

[Dragon_Taylor6]

Try. Very bad luck to the Titans.

 

[Rogue.9]

Its a sh*tty rule but it has to be a try otherwise it will be like when the obstuction rule came in & players intentinally ran into the decoy runners to get trys disallowed. This time they would just aim for the refs.

 

[cleary89]

I don't think the real question is whether its a try or not, but what the hell the referee was doing in that position? That was really, really, really poor positioning from the referee. It was always eventually going to happen that when you add an extra referee you have a chance of the referee interfering at a crucial stage.

Where should he have been?

 

[KiamaSaint]

I think it is a bit harsh to say the Ref was out of position. It was very unlucky and harsh for the Titans and if it had gone the other way it would have been harsh on the Dragons but let's put it into perspective, it doesn't happen too often and it certainly didn't change the outcome of the game.

They say you make your own luck and credit has to be given to Boyd for not giving up on the ball - most players would have pulled out ready to make a tackle on Zillman.

 

[JT_]

The ref backed into the path of the ball and obscured Zilman, should be no try imo.

 

[no name]

If Zillman could not see the ref how could he possibly see a much smaller object like a football.

Never heard the "leave the ball for the fullback when you are much closer" theory before....

So youre saying Zillman couldn't see the ball before he got impeded? :crazy:

As for leaving it for the fullback, in a position like that, leaving it for him is the right thing to do. Prince was getting in to a position to give Zillman cover. If Prince grabbed it, he probably would have been forced in goal. If Zillman wasn't impeded he would have had a better chance to get it out of the in goal area.

But it all comes back to the Dragons gaining an unfair advantage from an irregular incident. No try should have been given according to the rules.

 

[Gaba]

So youre saying Zillman couldn't see the ball before he got impeded? :crazy:

As for leaving it for the fullback, in a position like that, leaving it for him is the right thing to do. Prince was getting in to a position to give Zillman cover. If Prince grabbed it, he probably would have been forced in goal. If Zillman wasn't impeded he would have had a better chance to get it out of the in goal area.

But it all comes back to the Dragons gaining an unfair advantage from an irregular incident. No try should have been given according to the rules.

so the same rule according to you should apply to
if a player runs into his own player , and the other team scores from it ,no try should be given because the team who gathers the ball has an unfair advantage.

 

[no name]

Where the Fu<k have I said that? Keep up with the discussion.

Gaba saying it should be a try confirms it shouldn't have been.

 

[Gaba]

Where the Fu<k have I said that? Keep up with the discussion.

Gaba saying it should be a try confirms it shouldn't have been.

its no different , why should the try be taken off the team as Bennett said the dragons did no wrong