No sin bin

[Paul Hewson]

Good decision by the refs today. Both players jostling for the ball, trip over each other. Penalty try? :lol:

But he was penalised. So if both players were jostling for the ball shouldn't it have been play on? The fact that he was penalised and rightly so for committing a professional foul then the ref should have had no option but to sin bin him. It was simply a case of GIdley holding the player back and not jostling as you put it.

 

[Jesbass]

The Talanoa incident was a classic case for a penalty try. They can only give a penalty try should there be no doubt that a try would have been scored without the interference. The ball was rolling on the ground and despite Kirk still holding onto him Talanoa still was close to scoring the try.

What Gidley did yesterday was a professional foul and should have been an automatic sin bin. I can't see how the ref can penalise him for holding back yet not deem it to be a professional foul. That still has me shaking my head. There is no way that it should have been a penalty try.

Are the NRL rules on penalty tries different to the international rules? I know that in international rugby league, a penalty try can be given where there is still doubt that a try would have been scored, but where the player was robbed of the opportunity to attempt it. The "no doubt that a try would have been scored" line is a common perception in international football but it simply isn't correct, so I'm just wondering if the NRL rule differs?

Incidentally, if the "no doubt" clause is part of the NRL rule, shouldn't that mean that no penalty try is ever awarded? For example, a player could step over the sideline or the dead ball line, or drop it cold when planting it down, etc. How can anyone have absolutely no doubt regarding something that would be nothign more than pure speculation?

 

[skeepe]

Are the NRL rules on penalty tries different to the international rules? I know that in international rugby league, a penalty try can be given where there is still doubt that a try would have been scored, but where the player was robbed of the opportunity to attempt it. The "no doubt that a try would have been scored" line is a common perception in international football but it simply isn't correct, so I'm just wondering if the NRL rule differs?

Incidentally, if the "no doubt" clause is part of the NRL rule, shouldn't that mean that no penalty try is ever awarded? For example, a player could step over the sideline or the dead ball line, or drop it cold when planting it down, etc. How can anyone have absolutely no doubt regarding something that would be nothign more than pure speculation?

The international laws of the game (2008 version) state:

Section 6(d): the referee may award a penalty try if, in his opinion, a try would have been scored but for the unfair play of the defending team.

There is no "beyond all doubt" or anything like that in the laws, only that the referee believes it would have occurred but for the breach. Under the laws, I would have been quite happy to see a penalty try awarded against the Knights.

That said, the NRL does tend to differ quite significantly from the international laws in certain areas.

 

[Raider_69]

Compare Smiths sin bin on friday night, and gidleys non sin bin, does make you laugh though.

that was in the same league as the david milne one
terrible use of the sin bin

they've got this sin bin stuff all wrong this season, giddley should have gone without a shadow of a doubt.

 

[sherrinator]

The dirty cheating little bastard is at it again.

Gidley is a hack and has to resort to foul play to compete.

Such a shame he will be gifted a NSW spot this just because he's a Gidley. What a joke.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

So far this year we've had 3 players sent to the sin bin, each for no obvious reason:

David Milne
Jeremy Smith
Todd Payten

and 3 players commit clear professional fouls and stay on the field:

David Kidwell
Luke O'Donnell (Raiders player made a break, O'Donnell tackled and then pulled his legs as he was trying to get up for those who don't remember it)
Kurt Gidley

So basically, in 6 situations where either the sin bin was used or it should have been, the referees have got it right exactly 0% of the time.

Wonderful.

Thanks a lot Robert Finch.

Pathetic isn't it? There's no consistency with the professional foul ruling at all. There's also a lack of consistency with the playing advantage rule, as shown in our game vs the Sharks, and then the Tigers V Manly game yesterday. I wish they'd make up their minds. Is it a territorial advantavage, or a time with the ball advtangage? If you pass the ball is the advantage over?

FFS we need clarification.

 

[_Johnsy]

So you're saying it should have been a penalty try? :lol: He could have tripped over a blade of grass, knocked the ball on trying to pick it up. We'll never know :crazy:

Are you really that geniused. I'll try and make it easier for you.

I wrote Penalty try, no way

You know it deserved 10 in the bin, your inability to say as much says all that needs to be said. Typical drugcastle fan.

 

[Jobdog]

Are you really that geniused. I'll try and make it easier for you.

I wrote Penalty try, no way

You know it deserved 10 in the bin, your inability to say as much says all that needs to be said. Typical drugcastle fan.

:lol: Are you a comedian?

 

[Didgi]

Deliberate forearm to the back of the head to slow down the play the ball because he knew there were no Dragons players back, in Ashley Klein's own words.

Thanks for clearing that up. And you're right - the referees have so far gotten it rightt an amazing 0% of the time. :roll: BTW it looked to me that there were plenty of Dragons players back.

 

[Raider_69]

So far this year we've had 3 players sent to the sin bin, each for no obvious reason:

David Milne
Jeremy Smith
Todd Payten

and 3 players commit clear professional fouls and stay on the field:

David Kidwell
Luke O'Donnell (Raiders player made a break, O'Donnell tackled and then pulled his legs as he was trying to get up for those who don't remember it)
Kurt Gidley

So basically, in 6 situations where either the sin bin was used or it should have been, the referees have got it right exactly 0% of the time.

Wonderful.

Thanks a lot Robert Finch.

quite alarming
you're right, they have got it wrong on each of those 6 occasions

 

[keeney]

Gidley should definitely have gone to the bin. I was shocked when the ref just gently chastised him. Charmed luck it has to be said.

 

[Didgi]

Wooohooo finally a Knights supporter who can look at the facts and admit it was a sinbinnable offence

 

[Apey]

Wooohooo finally a Knights supporter who can look at the facts and admit it was a sinbinnable offence

Lol, go to our forum idiot. There is not a single person in there who disagrees.