Hodges Try?

[Mr Fourex]

Seriously yopu have NFI. Of course he gained an advantage because NSW were defending the decoy runner and JT who was expected to get the ball. By RUNNING BEHIND HIS OWN PLAYER he went straight into a gap created beacuse defenders were marking players who might get the ball.

Illegal play. No try EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK

You sooks can keep repeating this infinitum.......it's wrong.

Beau Scott never moved in and stayed focused on Hodges the entire time Hodges had the ball. He had every opportunity to tackle him

He was simply beaten for pace.

and I still maintain if Wobbie Whinger had of played the refs whistle and made an effort to actually defend instead of waving his arms about crying, he could have nearly gotten to Hodges.

In the end it was shit defence.........and anybody who knows anything about the game would unanimously agree.

 

[Cheops]

lol at Queensland bragging that their centre is faster than our back rower. How impressive. I'm sure Thaiday would be able to match it with Jennings though :crazy:

If Beau Scott had stayed on Hannant and never even attempted to tackle Hodges, would it still have been a try? Seems to me he was punished because he was nearly able to stop an illegal play.

Anyway, I don't really care about that try any more. I'm just not looking forward to the next 3 months if that's how they're going to rule it. They've turned yet another black and white rule that's worked fine for 100+ years into a grey area that will only lead to more controversy for no reason.

 

[hutch]

You sooks can keep repeating this infinitum.......it's wrong.

Beau Scott never moved in and stayed focused on Hodges the entire time Hodges had the ball. He had every opportunity to tackle him

He was simply beaten for pace.

and I still maintain if Wobbie Whinger had of played the refs whistle and made an effort to actually defend instead of waving his arms about crying, he could have nearly gotten to Hodges.

In the end it was shit defence.........and anybody who knows anything about the game would unanimously agree.

Well I know about the game, beaten for pace or not it doesn't matter! It shouldn't have been a try.

In saying that, we all need to move on cause the result isn't going to be reversed and at least we can all now concentrate on the nrl which has suffered this year during the origin period more than most years!

 

[Mr Fourex]

How has the NRL suffered?

If anything....the pinnacle of RL, State Of Origin,

has enhanced it.

State of Origin is the Jewel in the NRL's crown.

 

[Whats Doing]

You sooks can keep repeating this infinitum.......it's wrong.

Beau Scott never moved in and stayed focused on Hodges the entire time Hodges had the ball. He had every opportunity to tackle him

He was simply beaten for pace.

and I still maintain if Wobbie Whinger had of played the refs whistle and made an effort to actually defend instead of waving his arms about crying, he could have nearly gotten to Hodges.

In the end it was shit defence.........and anybody who knows anything about the game would unanimously agree.

I know a lot about the game and according to the rules it was NOT a try.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

It basically comes down to:

• Those who believe it wasn't a try, think that Hodges gained advantage from running behind the path of Hannant, by fending off Carney and having Scott hold off him
• Those who believe it was a try, think that Hodges gained no advantage from running behind the decoy runner, and that the play had no impact on the try due to sloppy defence from Carney and Scott.

At the end of the day, the only opinion that counts is this one:

 

[Whats Doing]

It basically comes down to:

• Those who believe it wasn't a try, think that Hodges gained advantage from running behind the path of Hannant, by fending off Carney and having Scott hold off him
• Those who believe it was a try, think that Hodges gained no advantage from running behind the decoy runner, and that the play had no impact on the try due to sloppy defence from Carney and Scott.

At the end of the day, the only opinion that counts is this one:

Whilst it is still the official opinion it it still the incorrect opinion. Same as the GI "official" try in the first SOS and we know what happened to that group of officials.

The rule which was amended last year is that the attacking side cannot gain an advantage.

Sorry but Hodges by scoring the try has gained an advantage

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

Identical incident happened in the NYC today that was penalised lol

 

[Bretto]

By the rules it's a try. Its there in black and white in the rule book.

 

[Mortar]

Whilst it is still the official opinion it it still the incorrect opinion. Same as the GI "official" try in the first SOS and we know what happened to that group of officials.

The rule which was amended last year is that the attacking side cannot gain an advantage.

Sorry but Hodges by scoring the try has gained an advantage

Stop talking shit....

What is your official stance on the Justin Hodges try in the first-half, is it an obstruction?

In 2011 we added an important clause to the interpretations around obstruction plays.
The change was that: ?If in the opinion of the referee or video referee the play had no effect on the scoring of a try then a try will be awarded.?
The reason for this change was that the obstruction rule had become so technical that tries were being disallowed when they shouldn?t have been.
There remain a number of indicators that referees should look for in determining if an obstruction has taken place but the over-riding one they must consider is whether a player actually had an effect on the try being scored.
In this case both video referees believed that Beau Scott wasn?t impeded by Ben Hannant?s decoy run and that Robbie Farah had minimal contact which did not alter the outcome.
Both video referees formed the view therefore that the player did not have an effect on the scoring of the try.
Having reviewed the footage today we support that position.

http://www.nrl.com/official-view-origin-iii/tabid/10874/newsid/68476/default.aspx

 

[Johns Magic]

Beau Scott never moved in and stayed focused on Hodges the entire time Hodges had the ball.

A complete lie

 

[Spot On]

This thread is going to haunt a few if a similar incident occurs to their team in a semi later this season.

 

[Big Pete]

It's pretty sad when the game would rather reward poor defence than good defence.

If Beau Scott reads the play poorly and puts himself in a position to only take Hannant it would have been awarded a no-try. However, since he gave himself a good chance to take Hodges it went the Maroons way.

Still unsure how I feel about it. At the very least, it was a 50/50 call that went the Maroons way.

 

[Mr Fourex]

A complete lie

Wipe the tears away from your eyes and watch it again.

Scott was always looking to take Hodges.

 

[Vic Mackey]

Wipe the tears away from your eyes and watch it again.

Scott was always looking to take Hodges.

Disagree completely

They replayed the incident in proper speed on the footy show this morning. It clearly shows Scott come infield for a split second. If you have ever played the game you understand that if a player goes behind someone else, even for a tenth of a second, it changes the way you defend them. If Scott's vision is never impaired then he continues to move across field and there is no gap at all for hodges to go through.

Being beau Scott there's a good chance he still would have missed the tackle, however as a defender you should never have to deal with something like this taking place

 

[Johns Magic]

Wipe the tears away from your eyes and watch it again.

Scott was always looking to take Hodges.

You are a terrible judge of football.

Scott definitely shapes in on Hannant. Go and watch it again.

 

[cornerposter]

I'm surprised you only scored 3 tries against a defence like that

Agree, we missed Lockyer more than I thought we would. Lucky Hodges scored a great try.

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

Simple fact is ,by the CURRENT RULES,it was a try.
No amount of tears ,whining ,bitching ,or complaining by butthurt NSW fans will change that.
Move on .
& you should be more worried about Sticky having pearce down as a certain,next yr ,than a series that is over .

 

[Mr Fourex]

Disagree completely

They replayed the incident in proper speed on the footy show this morning. It clearly shows Scott come infield for a split second. If you have ever played the game you understand that if a player goes behind someone else, even for a tenth of a second, it changes the way you defend them. If Scott's vision is never impaired then he continues to move across field and there is no gap at all for hodges to go through.

Being beau Scott there's a good chance he still would have missed the tackle, however as a defender you should never have to deal with something like this taking place

What....like dealing with a decoy runner? Pfft!!



Farah takes his eyes off Hodges and calls Hannant. Scott out wider still stays on Hodges. Hannant goes through and if it's this nano second when Beau Scott loses sight of Hodges you're talking about, then poor ole Beau needs a seeing eye dog.

IMO he was primarily focused on Hodges the whole time.

You are a terrible judge of football.

Scott definitely shapes in on Hannant. Go and watch it again.

It happened real early the dummie to Hannant, everyone had time to react, even Wobbie the whiner

Scott is always looking at Hodges when he steps in towards Hannant and then back out towards Hodges

........even if Hannant did end up getting the ball, Scott couldn't have tackled him anyway as he had positioned himself more to follow Hodges.

In the end he was simply beaten for speed.



[youtube]r56D0vLoo7c[/youtube]

 

[typicalfan]

Scott is looking at Hodges because he has the ball and is making a play at Hannant until Hannant runs past. Scott adjusts afterwards but he shouldn't have to accommodate Hodges running behind his own man to take advantage.

If Scott is a pea brain or pretends to be one and crashes into Hannant then it would have been awarded a no try but because he keeps himself alive enough to see Hodges has not passed he is punished.

The obstruction rule is so out of touch with the game. Wally Lewis didn't think it was a try every day of the week so I guess he knows nothing about the game.