Grounded or not?

[IanG]

Was watching in a pub with no sound.

As soon as that ball hit the ground with him on top of it, I called that's grounded. 102m later they score. Refs need to make the call on the spot but they are scared to sometimes.

What wouldve happened if the ball came loose & the dragons pounced on it - bet it would be grounded by the Roosters then!

+1 My first reaction was that was grounded and should ahvce been a line drop out. Regardless of intent. But when they awarded the try at the other end of the field without checking it my reaction was "That's Bullshit"

 

[Spanner in the works]

You obviously missed the point where he basically used the ball to help lever himself up off the ground and the point where the ball hits the ground where he falls over

As for the second point i cant remember a single instance of what you describe happening this year

You shouldn't have to look back far. I know Mini has slipped over a few times this year. I recall plenty of other fullbacks and wingers doing it too. What about when a team puts up a bomb? Player competes for the ball, lands on the ground and then manages to get back into the field of play? Accidental grounding there too? Where does it stop? Kickoffs too? How about in the rain?

 

[innsaneink]

SitWs...f**kwit...get a clue

 

[Danish]

It's a stupid rule. If he does that down the other end then gets up and tries to improve the position, they'll award the try where he slipped over.

more to the point, if the ball had popped out just afterwards and a dragon player grounded it, the video ref would have unquestionably ruled it a line drop out.

To me he grounded it, although he definitely kept his hand under it the whole time the point of the ball still touched the ground so really that has to be ruled a line drop out

 

[Spanner in the works]

SitWs...f**kwit...get a clue

Okay keyboard hero.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Was just watching the replay ( faarrkk the game did not get any better to watch )

The ball was actually 'grounded twice' the first was accidental while fumbled but the second was definite and the ball was used to help him get upright. Now that I have seen the replay I am convinced it should have been a line drop out.

 

[innsaneink]

more to the point, if the ball had popped out just afterwards and a dragon player grounded it, the video ref would have unquestionably ruled it a line drop out.

To me he grounded it, although he definitely kept his hand under it the whole time the point of the ball still touched the ground so really that has to be ruled a line drop out

Its unbelievably amateur....different ruling for the same action in differing scenarios...f**king hell our backyard footy contests were more pro than this shit

 

[Danish]

Its unbelievably amateur....different ruling for the same action in differing scenarios...f**king hell our backyard footy contests were more pro than this shit

Yep, playing under the honour system in the school yard ended in more consistent rulings FFS

 

[Dresden Dan]

Didn't in Origin game Brett Stewart slip in the ingoal & have the ball bounce away & a Queenslander ground it? The video referee gave that a no try.

Consistency seems to be the problem. Watching the league try to explain it all is funny.

 

[Apey]

more to the point, if the ball had popped out just afterwards and a dragon player grounded it, the video ref would have unquestionably ruled it a line drop out.

didn't think about that... they definitely would have, lol.

 

[BigRedV]

Never understand why the game creates problems for itself. Defender touches the ball down in goal, grounded, attacker touches it down try. No need for refs interpretation, just make it black and white so the poor bleeders don't have to make judgement calls!

100% agree with this.
Best team won no doubt, but result aside, it's just one more grey area especially when its so f**king simple to make an easy not up for interpretation rule. ie this ^

 

[innsaneink]

Didn't in Origin game Brett Stewart slip in the ingoal & have the ball bounce away & a Queenslander ground it? The video referee gave that a no try.

Consistency seems to be the problem. Watching the league try to explain it all is funny.

Taylor flew over the top of the ball....did NOT ground it

 

[Dresden Dan]

Taylor flew over the top of the ball....did NOT ground it

ok. But I think the video referee still ruled Stewart had grounded it first anyway even though it was very similar to last night's one.

 

[Firey_Dragon]

I have no problem with the ruling... However, what constitutes accidental grounding? We've seen plays this year where someone tries to bat a ball over the deadball line, inadvertantly making simultaneous contact with the ball and the ground, then not finding the deadball line... Only to have a try denied because the ball was 'grounded'. To me that is not deliberate grounding, but it's convenient for the try to not be awarded.

Jekyll and hyde in the rules again... Should be black and white, but the NRL is intent on making the rules as open to interpretation as possible.

Roosters thoroughly deserved the win though.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

He fell over. He didn't exert any downward pressure on it.

He put his weight on the ball and used it to prop himself up. If that's not exerting downward pressure then nothing is. Also, if not for grounding the ball he would have dropped it in goal. It should have been a goal line drop out from the chooks.

 

[Yosemite Sam]

He fell over. He didn't exert any downward pressure on it.

He had more downward pressure there than half the 'tries' awarded these days.

 

[the bondi spy]

SitWs...f**kwit...get a clue

Blah blah blah, ferme la Bouche douche bag

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

It was grounded all right. To compound matters Timmy two teams heard a faint blow of the whistle which caused chaos and confusion in the defence.

Not a single f**k was given

All the bad calls that we endured this year you won't get sympathy from us. It evens out they keep telling us.

 

[Honkiest_Honky]

It obviously wasn't intentional. You don't need intent to ground it imo, he put pressure on the ball when it was in the in-goal. No-one intends to knock the ball on, maybe they shouldn't be knock-on's anymore? He made a mistake, and grounded the ball. Line drop.

So if a player picks up a ball from the ground in the in goal area it should be counted as grounded because he grounds the ball in the process of picking the ball up?

 

[MSIH]

So if a player picks up a ball from the ground in the in goal area it should be counted as grounded because he grounds the ball in the process of picking the ball up?

I think you missed the part where I said "he put pressure on the ball".