Canberra/Broncos reffing SHOCKER!

[Raider_69]

no i think those decisions were fine. You were denied the oppetunity because your teams inept and dismal performance and failure to hold on to the ball or make the right decisions at crucial times. Plus the coaching staff picking the wrong players. If Dobson was playing maybe it would of been different?

if you think those decisions were right, you need to seek help
no way in the world was either a correct call

 

[BrisVegas]

I'll agree that the Carney no try could have easily been award - but if you look back over similar incidents this year the ruling has been inconsistent (ie the Cowboys no-try on Friday night). Having the video referee rule on a players intent in instances other than foul play is asking for many contentious rulings to be made. In the off season the rules need to be changed to remove these annoying rule "interpretations" from the game.

But to claim match fixing? If that was the case why was the Thorn no-try not given the green light? Add to that Canberra cracking 20 errors and giving away many stupid relieving penalties (5-0) at one stage, and it easy to see that the green machine just weren't good enough on the day.

 

[Monk]

broncos won as they were the better team...doy

 

[Ebony]

I'll agree that the Carney no try could have easily been award - but if you look back over similar incidents this year the ruling has been inconsistent (ie the Cowboys no-try on Friday night). Having the video referee rule on a players intent in instances other than foul play is asking for many contentious rulings to be made. In the off season the rules need to be changed to remove these annoying rule "interpretations" from the game.

But to claim match fixing? If that was the case why was the Thorn no-try not given the green light? Add to that Canberra cracking 20 errors and giving away many stupid relieving penalties (5-0) at one stage, and it easy to see that the green machine just weren't good enough on the day.

clever, throw the substandard reffing debacle back onto the Canberra supporters...jeez that takes away the responsibility of the officials to get it right, especially when their crooked cockups were so blatant.

Yeah it was the swansong for so many Bronco stalwart players, and on their home ground, yeah, yeah and yeah again..but the REFFING is the focus here not about all the stuff occuring around that.

The refs were either stupid, substandard and stoned and should go OR they were on the take, and should be sacked...its one or the other.

 

[Big Pete]

Carney's no try was a tough call but again it was consistent.

Michaels try was definatly benefit of the doubt mind you.

Also if it was match fixing why were the Raiders allowed to lie all over the PTB, get away with head highs and at various stages were allowed to be offside? Add to that Thorns No Try which could of easily been BotD? What about Perry being taken out late as well?

 

[salivor]

I just wanted your advice guys. I've got this product that I'm thinking of launching into the Canberra market which I think will sell like hot cakes. It's simple and easy to produce, made out of normal household tinsel. It's main function is protecting aliens, government and NRL officials from reading your mind:

 

[BrisVegas]

clever, throw the substandard reffing debacle back onto the Canberra supporters...jeez that takes away the responsibility of the officials to get it right, especially when their crooked cockups were so blatant.

Yeah it was the swansong for so many Bronco stalwart players, and on their home ground, yeah, yeah and yeah again..but the REFFING is the focus here not about all the stuff occuring around that.

The refs were either stupid, substandard and stoned and should go OR they were on the take, and should be sacked...its one or the other.

If anything my gripe is the way the current rules are written. The referees are being asked to rule on a players intent from a few freeze frames over the space of a seconds play. Whenever you ask someone to make a decision based on someone else's state of mind with limited evidence and time it's going to be left open to interpretation. Who is to say your or anyone else's interpretation of the events are right or wrong, as long as the person making the decision can explain how they logically came to their conclusion.

To blame the referees is a cop-out, they are simply implementing NRL policy to the best of their ability (although some would argue otherwise). The real blames lies with the NRL in creating rules that leave such important rulings to interpretation, robing the players and fans of any sort of consistency.

 

[Charlie124]

I just wanted your advice guys. I've got this product that I'm thinking of launching into the Canberra market which I think will sell like hot cakes. It's simple and easy to produce, made out of normal household tinsel. It's main function is producting aliens, government and NRL officials from reading your mind:

Producting Aliens?

 

[salivor]

Producting Aliens?

Lol, that too, it's the product that just keep giving.

 

[NPK]

The Carney no try was exactly what happened with Jason Smith on Friday night. It was talked about on the Roast today too - the tackler goes in with a round arm technique that deliberately plays at the ball if the ball gets passed. Why else would they go in with that round arm motion??

 

[lockyrulz]

if you think those decisions were right, you need to seek help
no way in the world was either a correct call

It was the exact same decision that denied Jason Smith a try on Friday night. Cowboys still won.

I thought we wanted consistency. Guess not.

It was discussed on the Roast this morning, and they couldn't agree.

The ref felt he played at the ball. As the vid ref felt Smith played at the ball friday night.

As for a 12 point turn around, please... What stopped the Raiders from holding the broncos out? Not the video Ref thats for sure.

 

[salivor]

Gus was spot on, on the Roast today. Players have made it an art form or coming in with that round arm action to either prevent the ball carrier passing or knock it down in the process of the ball carrier passing.

 

[Raider_69]

to wrap the ball up and stop it from being prompted, the player isnt playing at the football, he is playing at the ball carrier and making a tackle. Rubbish call

 

[flash]

it probably changed the game, but having David Howell out there wasnt helping the raiders either.

 

[Mr Saab]

to wrap the ball up and stop it from being prompted, the player isnt playing at the football, he is making a tackle. Rubbish call

Whats that old saying Raider?
Swings and Roundabouts?
I recall the Raiders winning a game in GP vs the Tigers when they were offside everytime the Tigers went for a field goal.
Were you whinging then?

 

[Big Pete]

So R69 if I went to tackle you and to make sure you didn't pass it I would stick my hand out to where you were passing it to initiate the tackle that's not playing at the football?

 

[salivor]

to wrap the ball up and stop it from being prompted, the player isnt playing at the football, he is playing at the ball carrier and making a tackle. Rubbish call

Players going into the tackle with the round arm action are clearly trying to prevent the player from passing and therefore are playing at the football. If it hits their arm, tough luck, centres and wingers in particular use the technique all the time to prevent tries.

As others have said, the call was consistant with what we've already seen this week with the Jason Smith call. The Michaels try was also consistant with the rule book and other decisions we've seen all season.

 

[Ebony]

the angle of being consistent is crazy...your saying as long as the refs are consistently stupid thats ok and thats all we can expect!???

well with idiots running the game...and blatant uselessness allowed to prosper at our highest level, inept refs, blind video refs and stupid boyboy bronco groupies no wonder our game has such a hard time gaining popularity out of the 5 countries that play it at present.

How can anybody in their right mind condone that reffing today?? shows how conditioned some of us are to not contesting idiotic officiating ...

not a good look locally or internationally and it ruins the game

 

[Raider_69]

So R69 if I went to tackle you and to make sure you didn't pass it I would stick my hand out to where you were passing it to initiate the tackle that's not playing at the football?

he didnt stick his hand out, the ball was passed into his hand, the same way if a kick is kicked into you, its not played at, unless you make a play for it, Carney never made a play for the footy, the ball was passed into him.

Sabb, that game i agreed with the first attempt should have been a penalty, but the second on where involving carney at the time was correct, they've since changed the rules so that both feet must be behind the line, at the time of the play the ball, carney had one foot behind, which was fine according to the rules at the time.

And for the record, even if that was a bad call, 2 wrongs dont make a right

 

[Big Pete]

he didnt stick his hand out, the ball was passed into his hand, the same way if a kick is kicked into you, its not played at, unless you make a play for it, Carney never made a play for the footy, the ball was passed into him.

Sabb, that game i agreed with the first attempt should have been a penalty, but the second on where involving carney at the time was correct, they've since changed the rules so that both feet must be behind the line, at the time of the play the ball, carney had one foot behind, which was fine according to the rules at the time.

And for the record, even if that was a bad call, 2 wrongs dont make a right

He did stick his arm out to initiate he tackle right where Perry was going to pass it.