King Try ?

[UndertakerMike]

I see 48 posters so far have failed the subliminal eye test.

 

[mcbulldog]

try, this was one of the more obvious ones this year!

 

[UndertakerMike]

It's his way of saying "yeah...we stuffed up but we're not responsible".

No ... This is Bill Harrigan saying everyone but Bill Harrigan stuffed up. :crazy:

 

[UndertakerMike]

 

[juanfarkall]

I am pretty sure that it is not a try unless the referee or video referee award it. This is indicated by the referee pointing to the spot where the ball was placed for the try and blowing the whistle.If the video referee awards the try, then the word "TRY" appears on the big screen in green lettering.

73 people must have problems with their TV's or eyesight because no try was awarded.

 

[Whats Doing]

I am pretty sure that it is not a try unless the referee or video referee award it. This is indicated by the referee pointing to the spot where the ball was placed for the try and blowing the whistle.If the video referee awards the try, then the word "TRY" appears on the big screen in green lettering.

73 people must have problems with their TV's or eyesight because no try was awarded.

Your name says it all:- Youknowfu#kall

 

[juanfarkall]

Your name says it all:- Youknowfu#kall

so was the "try" awarded ?

 

[UndertakerMike]

juanknowfarkall

 

[juanfarkall]

juanknowfarkall

did Simpkins award the try ???

must have missed that.

 

[Lowdown]

I am pretty sure that it is not a try unless the referee or video referee award it. This is indicated by the referee pointing to the spot where the ball was placed for the try and blowing the whistle.If the video referee awards the try, then the word "TRY" appears on the big screen in green lettering.

73 people must have problems with their TV's or eyesight because no try was awarded.

Obviously you are a tossbag mate. This argument is not whether or not a try WAS awarded, it whether it was the right decision.

Even an imbecile, idiotic, twat could figure that out...

 

[juanfarkall]

Obviously you are a tossbag mate. This argument is not whether or not a try WAS awarded, it whether it was the right decision.

Even an imbecile, idiotic, twat could figure that out...

Are you going to review every other dodgey decision throughout the year whether it affected a match's result or not ?

Nope.

This argument is not whether or not a try WAS awarded, or even if it was the right decision, it is about trying to blame a lost grand final on the match officials.

Even an imbecile, idiotic, twat could figure that out...

Change greengrocers.

Those grapes are way too sour.

 

[Ant]

No the argument from many is whether the try should or should not have been awarded.

Some are saying Melb were robbed, I am just saying it was a wrong decision at extremely crucial time in the match. I don't know if melb could have won if that try was given, nobody knows that.

But it was a massive decision that is clearly wrong at crucial time of the match. If you can't see that the match changing from 14-8 to 14-14 with under 15 minutes to go is crucial moment.

Yes there are some people who are very bitter and twisted about the game and the reffing, if I was a storm supporter I would be too.

But the question in this thread is should it have been a try or not, the answer for anyone who has watched the footage closely is yes it should have been try.
Did the video refs make a major blunder? Yes they did.
Did it have a major effect on the match? Of course it did.
Would the storm have won if the call was made correctly? Well no, brisbane may have still won.
Would the storm's chances have increased? Obviosuly yes.

Juanfarkall, I am not really sure why you keep posting in this thread. Your points seem to be that the try was not awarded, well that can't be debated, we are asking should it have been you don't seem to want to enter that debate. Your other point seems to be that people are blaming the officials for melb losing, well many in here are not doing that, they are just saying it should have been a try.

My suggestion is that if you wish to post something about whether the try should or should not have been given, please do. Otherwise stop clogging the pages with dribble. I have no doubt based on your previous posts, you will take the option of continued dribble.

 

[JJ]

No replay was conclusive.

Benefit of the doubt to the broncos.

correct decision made.

except benefit of the doubt is supposed to go to the attacking team...

 

[The Preacher]

except benefit of the doubt is supposed to go to the attacking team...

Coooooorrreeectt !!!;-)

 

[juanfarkall]

No the argument from many is whether the try should or should not have been awarded.

Some are saying Melb were robbed, I am just saying it was a wrong decision at extremely crucial time in the match. I don't know if melb could have won if that try was given, nobody knows that.

But it was a massive decision that is clearly wrong at crucial time of the match. If you can't see that the match changing from 14-8 to 14-14 with under 15 minutes to go is crucial moment.

Yes there are some people who are very bitter and twisted about the game and the reffing, if I was a storm supporter I would be too.

But the question in this thread is should it have been a try or not, the answer for anyone who has watched the footage closely is yes it should have been try.
Did the video refs make a major blunder? Yes they did.
Did it have a major effect on the match? Of course it did.
Would the storm have won if the call was made correctly? Well no, brisbane may have still won.
Would the storm's chances have increased? Obviosuly yes.

Juanfarkall, I am not really sure why you keep posting in this thread. Your points seem to be that the try was not awarded, well that can't be debated, we are asking should it have been you don't seem to want to enter that debate. Your other point seems to be that people are blaming the officials for melb losing, well many in here are not doing that, they are just saying it should have been a try.

My suggestion is that if you wish to post something about whether the try should or should not have been given, please do. Otherwise stop clogging the pages with dribble. I have no doubt based on your previous posts, you will take the option of continued dribble.

Fair argument.

My point is that there have throughout this season been many occasions where dodgey decisions have been made by both video referees and on-ground officials.
Some of those decisions have definitely affected the positions in the Top 8 when you consider that points for/against seperated 4 teams.
Is anyone questioning those decisions or the fact that had those decisions been different, the grand final may or may not have had different teams?
Similarly dodgey decisions have affected results/scorelines throughout the finals series.


So, based upon the way that decisions have been made in 2006 it is impossible to say that the try should have been awarded.

Unless you are suggesting that the rules should be enforced differently just because it is a grand final.

But hey, if you are like most here who just want to attack someone because they hold a different opinion or because you hate the Broncos and think that I am a Broncos fan feel free. I hate the Broncos with a passion. However I hate crybabies who cannot accept the referee's decision even more.

 

[icewind]

when it all comes down to it... storm still choked. n where theres a will theres a way.... origin 3 anyone?

 

[jimmythehand]

for me all these arguments are more about

"should we accept the referees the decision"

vs

"should we try and find ways to improve the referees decisions".

I think if we like solution 1 then we should get rid of the video ref and also reduce the number of replays of controversial incidents (they did this in the cricket world cup didn't they). If we don't see the controversy it can't rile us up.

I think if we like solution 2 we need to embrace technology more and use it in the challenge system (as I've posted months ago and recently).

Whichever way, the current system is dead smack in the middle and sh*ts so many people off because of the inconsistencies and glaring errors that we see all too often. It needs to be changed.

 

[_Johnsy]

get over it

 

[phonetic]

Try in my opinion.

However I don't feel sorry for Melbourne. They've gotten away with more than most this year, especially in regards to the ruck.

Bad decisions are always going to be part of the game, you just hope they don't come against your team at such a crucial moment... unfortunately for the Storm that's the way the cookie crumbled. No point whinging, just look towards 2007. No sympathy here.

 

[Balmain_Boy]

Phonetic that middle line is absolutely spot on. Forward passes and working men over in the ruck have been the order of the day for Melbourne. I was stoked when it didn't take them to the premiership.