Brett Stewart Try

[danno]

As it has been rightly pointed out, a player can'tpass or tap the ball forward, for himself or anyone else. However, the point that some of you are missing is, Stewart wasn't in possession of the ball prior to tapping it forward. This is the key to the whole argument.

The point you are missing is that Stewart did have possession of the ball and deliberately tapped the ball forward for himself. It was all in one motion, but he had control of the ball when he deliberately tapped it forward.

 

[CliffyIsGod]

The point you are missing is that Stewart did have possession of the ball and deliberately tapped the ball forward for himself. It was all in one motion, but he had control of the ball when he deliberately tapped it forward.

Too bad you can't prove it.

To me, he could quite rake it it, so it popped of his hand and he caught it in the next attempt. Much like the try he scored against the Tigers at Brookie a few years ago.

 

[RL1908]

A point to consider: Gordon looked to try to do the same thing after Stewart batted it, if he had been successful and batted it back over Stewart's head and regathered would a double knock-on be called against him? My initial thought is no, play on, what do others think?

Penalty against Stewart for the first deliberate knock forward.

If you thought Stewart didn't do it deliberately, then a penalty against Gordon for a deliberate knock forward.

If you thought both Stewart and Gordon accidentially knocked it forward, and Gordon recovered the ball before it hit the ground, then Penrith should be allowed to play on (otherwise, a double knock-on and put down a scrum with a Penrith feed).

 

[Eels Dude]

A point to consider: Gordon looked to try to do the same thing after Stewart batted it, if he had been successful and batted it back over Stewart's head and regathered would a double knock-on be called against him? My initial thought is no, play on, what do others think?

Play on based on yesterday's ruling.

However if the referee had ruled at the time that what Stewart did was deliberate it would be penalty to Penrith. I doubt that would happen though, but should be the correct ruling.

 

[RL1908]

Too bad you can't prove it.

To me, he could quite rake it it, so it popped of his hand and he caught it in the next attempt. Much like the try he scored against the Tigers at Brookie a few years ago.

No problems with that - if it was accidental.

I've still got my doubts about that try against Wests Tigers - the ball was only ever going to go forward from his hand, which is going awfully close to a deliberate knock forward.

As I said, 100 years ago they would have penalised both of Stewart's tries.

I just find it all a bit quirky - there is obviously a fair bit of leeway being given to allowing players to (seemingly) deliberately knock the ball forward taking intercepts and like Stewart's 2 tries (last night & v Wests Tigers), yet if a player accidentially drops the ball downwards, the referees jump on it as a knock-forward.

It's remarkable when you consider that the original intent of the rules was to penalise what Stewart seemingly did, and today we allow it, along with most intecepts, while all the time pulling up play for accidentially dropping the ball downwards, even though it is even in the rule book at all.

"Forward" and "downward" are not the same.

 

[LordLeague]

Just one of many decisions that went Manly's way yet again.

At least we're discussing the actual footy for a change, albeit how sh!t it was refereed.

LordLeague

 

[Geohood]

Well it takes skill to pull it off and I don't think players will be able to go and do it as easily as Stewart did last night...

Think about when players sometimes are about to knock on then start juggling it to regather on purpose... the ball goes forward alot of those times.

 

[danno]

Too bad you can't prove it.

To me, he could quite rake it it, so it popped of his hand and he caught it in the next attempt. Much like the try he scored against the Tigers at Brookie a few years ago.

No I can't prove it. It's only my opinion, and you know what opinions are like.

It didn't pop out of his hand as you put it (in my opinion), he deliberately tapped it and it went forward. His intention may have been to tap it straight up in the air not in a forward motion, I don't know what Hayne's ruling on it was.

 

[LordLeague]

There's a difference between juggling a catch or knocking down/juggling an intercept and what Brett Stewart did, which was deliberately knocking the ball forward over the head of another player.

It should have been no try, no matter how "classy" it was Matthew Johns.

LordlLeague

 

[danno]

Well it takes skill to pull it off and I don't think players will be able to go and do it as easily as Stewart did last night...

Think about when players sometimes are about to knock on then start juggling it to regather on purpose... the ball goes forward alot of those times.

"About to knock on" and deliberately tapping it to regather are two different things.

 

[Chachi]

It was clearly a no try according to the rules of the game.

Then again, Wade Grahams pass in the first half was also clearly not forward.

As long as the referees decisions are consistent that is the main thing...and all the decisions consistently go in Manly's favour...so according to Robert Finch everything is fine.

:|

 

[Dutchy]

and all the decisions consistently go in Manly's favour...so according to Robert Finch everything is fine.

Yeah, thats why we are the most penalised team in the comp.

 

[Daddycool]

My point was, in the threads previous to mine, the precedent being used was Dally M passing the ball forward and regathering. Thus a player already in possession.
Now.....danno, I don't think "a tap on" constitutes being in possession.
Consider this. A player is going for an intercept. he knocks the ball up and forward, regathers before it hits the ground, runs away, scores. Fair try or not? Or instead of knocking it up, he hits it down, forward into the ground. Penalty for deliberate knock on or simple knock on, scrum and feed to attacking team. Regardless of what the rules say, what is the most likely call from the Ref in each case?

 

[Eels Dude]

My point was, in the threads previous to mine, the precedent being used was Dally M passing the ball forward and regathering. Thus a player already in possession.
Now.....danno, I don't think "a tap on" constitutes being in possession.
Consider this. A player is going for an intercept. he knocks the ball up and forward, regathers before it hits the ground, runs away, scores. Fair try or not? Or instead of knocking it up, he hits it down, forward into the ground. Penalty for deliberate knock on or simple knock on, scrum and feed to attacking team. Regardless of what the rules say, what is the most likely call from the Ref in each case?

What the ref rules shouldn't matter, as it's not a situation that occurs very often, and referees are going to be reluctant to penalise a player in this case.

I think the onus should be on the side who is in possesion, rather than the player in possession. So in regards to an intercept, knocking it forward and regathering is going to be a reaction rather than an attempt to decieve the opposition. Stewert's looked like it was meant to decieve the opposition though.

And also, knocking forward

 

[sting]

bit of a grey area i think..

i mean when players are going for an intercept by sticking their hand out at the ball the regathering, or trying to knock the ball down when the other team has an overlap are both fairly deliberate. Often a player will deliberately knock the ball forward as another set of six is a better result defensively then a winger on the outside and a possible try! what you think?

 

[maple_69]

Since I'm an obviously biased Penrith supporter and I was way past the point of caring by that point last night I wont weigh into the debate.

But doesn't it sh*t everyone that the commentators mentioned it agreed it was probably illegal but then said "but hey it looked great so screw the rules". What a great attitude and one reason refs continually get away with such incompetence.

 

[Eels Dude]

bit of a grey area i think..

i mean when players are going for an intercept by sticking their hand out at the ball the regathering, or trying to knock the ball down when the other team has an overlap are both fairly deliberate. Often a player will deliberately knock the ball forward as another set of six is a better result defensively then a winger on the outside and a possible try! what you think?

Agree. Though I feel there is a difference between knocking the ball down to prevent a try and deliberately doing it to decieve the the defending side in an attempt to score, and over a players head at that.

 

[strewth_mate]

Seems the correct rules have been defined a few times now by Sean but they're being strangely ignored... Thought this was an interesting point though -

It is unlawful to take an intercept by deliberately knocking the ball forward. There are many intercepts allowed that are far more deliberate than what Stewart did - and they too are unlawful.

Fair to say these rules might be ignored to an extent for the sake of increasing the spectacle? Never considered it in the context of an intercept.

 

[sting]

not ignored by us, seems they're ignored by the officials as they happen all the time!

 

[mxlegend99]

It's pretty hard to deny that he deliberately tapped the ball over the Panthers players head. That's a deliberate knock-on.

Although IIRC, the referee awarded that without going to the video referee. From his point of view, he might not have seen Brett Stewart deliberately knock the ball on. He had a great view of the grounding though, and had no reason to believe it wasn't a try.