Graeme West (Possible Spoiler)

[Iafeta]

didnt watch the game hey??

Explain?

I'm responding to someone saying Riddell pushed McKinnon forward, its irrespective, if McKinnon did move forward as was suggested in that post it doesn't make it right - its still a penalty.

 

[Y2Eel]

Incase you're unaware, the defender is allowed to move forward in an attempt to make a defensive play.

Do you honestly think defenders sit back on their line and don't move forward?

Irrespective of his movements, the penalty was as a result of McKinnon putting his arm out, thats the difference, it showed some form of intent. If he stood there, did nothing, nothing wrong - try time.

well you said wade moved into bowen judt clearing you up...

hey i understoo why it was a penalty but if that deserved a penalty lets see how many times its pulled up today and tomorrow

 

[Iafeta]

as ive said it looked as though bowen firstly ran into wades left side.. it was a reaction he prolbably didnt know piggy was going to scoot

Again, its irrespective isn't it.

If McKinnon stands there, either puts his hands in the air, or leaves them where they are, Bowen has made the error and its play on and a try.

McKinnon though, some of your own fans have suggested was pushed forward by Riddell, debatable, but undisputedly put his arm/hand into the path of Matt Bowen.

Penalty. Obstruction.

 

[Y2Eel]

Explain?

I'm responding to someone saying Riddell pushed McKinnon forward, its irrespective, if McKinnon did move forward as was suggested in that post it doesn't make it right - its still a penalty.

riddell went to the right of wade and bowen as youvbe stated is allowed to move into the player...

 

[Y2Eel]

Again, its irrespective isn't it.

If McKinnon stands there, either puts his hands in the air, or leaves them where they are, Bowen has made the error and its play on and a try.

McKinnon though, some of your own fans have suggested was pushed forward by Riddell, debatable, but undisputedly put his arm/hand into the path of Matt Bowen.

Penalty. Obstruction.

and again lets see how many times its pulled up today

 

[Iafeta]

How is he ment to "scoot" and dive for the line then?? he went to the right of the guy playing the ball and he didnt go under his legs so i'd say that rule is ok.. holding a player back is a penalty, which it was...

Correct. Spot on.

 

[Iafeta]

and again lets see how many times its pulled up today

Probably no times. Although I did notice a bit of a blitz last year, or the year before where they penalised "sleepers", players standing between the defensive line and the play of the ball, and also I can recall (not exact instances) where players held onto the 'marker' or 'defender' and were either penalised or had tries denied - often though moreso in try scoring movements referred to the video referee.

The referees are inconsistent, and not good enough for sure, but when it goes to the video referee he can't think - hmmm, Clark would have got that, Hayne wouldn't have, the majority wouldn't have, therefore try. He's got to govern by the rule book.

 

[Y2Eel]

Probably no times. Although I did notice a bit of a blitz last year, or the year before where they penalised "sleepers", players standing between the defensive line and the play of the ball, and also I can recall (not exact instances) where players held onto the 'marker' or 'defender' and were either penalised or had tries denied - often though moreso in try scoring movements referred to the video referee.

The referees are inconsistent, and not good enough for sure, but when it goes to the video referee he can't think - hmmm, Clark would have got that, Hayne wouldn't have, the majority wouldn't have, therefore try. He's got to govern by the rule book.

it was still a line ball decision bowen was never going to stop piggy, some common sense and logic would have to come into play...

 

[Iafeta]

Not from the video referee. His mandate doesn't involve that sort of discretion. His only decision here is did it happen, or did it not happen, not speculating on what the end result would have been.

Discretion in that sense is only afforded to on field referees, not the video referee.

 

[Sea_Eagles_Rock]

now you're off on some other tangent

nfi what you're on about

You and all the other cry babies are the ones with NFI. Everybody has clearly made the point it's a no try. You can't walk forward and grab a player with your hands while Ronald McDonald rolls over the line.

 

[El Diablo]

You and all the other cry babies are the ones with NFI. Everybody has clearly made the point it's a no try. You can't walk forward and grab a player with your hands while Ronald McDonald rolls over the line.

you're the one carrying on like a little girl. hardly surprising seeing you support Manly :lol:

 

[Kornstar]

I am happy to accept the decision but why wasn't the same rule applied last week when Sutton was stopped from making a tackle on Barrett? Why is it one rule for St George and a completely different rule for everyone else????

 

[Iafeta]

Kornstar, in my opinion, that was no try also. That was a woeful, woeful call that one.

 

[Kornstar]

Of course it was no try, that is the point, why was the correct rule applied last night but not last week?

Robert Finch needs to discipline his staff cause they are a joke!!!

 

[Bring Back the Spliff]

I cannot believe anyone is even questioning that deecision.

Obstruction - as clear as crystal. Not just a step forward - but a sly and DELIBERATE effort to take...was it Bowen?...Out of play.

Yes moffo and Mistybee - when everyone has to stand on the line - or behind it - ALL players are automatically onside - and can stand where they want.

They could have 13 'markers' in that situation if they wanted to. You see it EVERY time teams are defending on their own line. Every single time. Are you serious???

How much footy do you two watch or have played in the past? Even Under 8's know that. You're deadset kidding.

 

[nqboy]

One point I don't understand from MB and others is their obsession with "the marker". It doesn't matter whether Bowen was the marker or not (he was), any obstruction is liable to be penalised.

 

[Iafeta]

Of course it was no try, that is the point, why was the correct rule applied last night but not last week?

Robert Finch needs to discipline his staff cause they are a joke!!!

It was Hampstead wasn't it?

That was a disgraceful decision. I'd love to hear his reasons why he awarded it. Clear obstruction on John Sutton.

nqboy, correct. The definition marker and defender are neither here nor there, you can't obstruct a marker, a defender one off the ruck, a defender one in from the sideline.

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

I must apoligise to all those dragons fans out there as i had you lot as the worst losers & biggest sooks when your team got rolled .. Well i was very wrong , Mb,&co are quite possibly the biggest sooks i have ever seen . You cannot grab someone who is ready to make a tackle & deny him the chance of doing so .. end of story.. get over it &move on . I'm sure as an eels fan it wont' be your only dissapointment this yr..