NRL admit f/pass error V Panthers

[papabear]

I think the pass was forward and I think it's good that Tony Archer has come out and been transparent with his opinion on it.

The only issue I have is why he seems to pick and choose the calls he wishes to come out publicly on. If he's going to offer commentary on calls in a game then there needs to be consistent commentary for every game across every round.

I agree with this.

I think there should be publicly released document going through every decision, why it was made and whether it was right or wrong.

Also each non call, where there was a push in the play the ball and why no penalty was given or they were held down for a bit longer and no call given.

Until someone starts putting effort in to look at each play and get consistency you will never get it.

 

[Bgoodorgoodatit]

Pedantry aside, my point is that deciding on a forward pass on video isn't an instant decision and don't think fans are willing to wait for elongated decisions - which is precisely one of the reasons the Bunker was instituted.

As for reviews - the NRLBunker twitter posts each decision usually within a few minutes on it's account, while those "further reviews" you hear about are normally posted on the NRL's twitter account.

That's the match highlights, not the NRL "trying to claim it's a try".

Here is what they released on Monday of last week:

Think you might have missed the text under the match highlights there. Danish was just asking if this i.e. the Cornder try in the highlights was the one you were referring to and asked for more info.

The link you posted is now saying media no longer available. Were they trying to say that pass was forward as well?? if so they are having a laugh...

 

[adamkungl]

Think you might have missed the text under the match highlights there. Danish was just asking if this i.e. the Cornder try in the highlights was the one you were referring to and asked for more info.

The link you posted is now saying media no longer available. Were they trying to say that pass was forward as well?? if so they are having a laugh...

Nah fearless leader Tony Archer has made up an obstruction lol

 

[Bgoodorgoodatit]

Nah fearless leader Tony Archer has made up an obstruction lol

Just watched it again. You're taking the piss right? what was the actual explanation? There's no decoys in that play unless he's trying to say the Keary obstructed the defence while they were affecting a tackle on him while he still had the ball.. if that's the new standard there's going to be a f**king hell of a lot of obstruction penalties in a game.. say 35 sets per team each game so 70 x 6 tackles per set gives us oh about 420 penalties per game.. good work Tony....

 

[adamkungl]

Just watched it again. You're taking the piss right? what was the actual explanation? There's no decoys in that play unless he's trying to say the Keary obstructed the defence while they were affecting a tackle on him while he still had the ball.. if that's the new standard there's going to be a f**king hell of a lot of obstruction penalties in a game.. say 35 sets per team each game so 70 x 6 tackles per set gives us oh about 420 penalties per game.. good work Tony....

He was half a step inside/behind Napa when he caught the ball so technically ran behind his own player. Never mind that he was metres behind for less than a split second and for any Dogs player to be obstructed they would have to be moving at the speed of sound.

 

[Bgoodorgoodatit]

He was half a step inside/behind Napa when he caught the ball so technically ran behind his own player. Never mind that he was metres behind for less than a split second and for any Dogs player to be obstructed they would have to be moving at the speed of sound.

ha-ha Napa's run was so unconvincing I didn't even notice him the first time and from looking at it again neither did the bulldogs players...

 

[Timmah]

Think you might have missed the text under the match highlights there. Danish was just asking if this i.e. the Cornder try in the highlights was the one you were referring to and asked for more info.

The link you posted is now saying media no longer available. Were they trying to say that pass was forward as well?? if so they are having a laugh...

Yep I mixed up what he meant there. I blame the halved sentences either side of the video

As for the link - it's working cleanly for me. It was implying Cordner's try was the result of an obstruction. I don't necessarily agree that sort of thing should be called as that - but I can see the reasoning given Keary catches it inside, rather than outside Napa and has to "go around him".

Ultimately it's a poor read by Eastwood but under the current interpretations they should've disallowed it.

 

[AJB1102]

This . . . and they need to stop searching for reasons to stop a game.

I'm sure most of us wouldn't pick on them if they let things that didn't matter slide . . . would we?

I certainly wouldn't mind.

A lot of the time I feel the refs contribute to it a bit. Especially in games that get off to a bit of a crap start, particularly in the early rounds, where both sides are as sloppy as each other. We're already getting shit footy we don't need a ton of penalties to make it worse.

But refs have no feel for a game. They can't tell the difference between 2 sides being a bit shit and 1 side illegally attempting to halt the momentum of a better side.

If the players aren't putting on a good performance we don't need a whistle blower to take up the spotlight.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Interesting comment by Andrew Voss in his weekly column on the NRL's website regarding forward passes -

Is there any technology that could help police forward passes?

My answer is no. Not that I'm aware of.

I don't want to go to the video to check on forward passes. We tried that before and it was a disaster.

Anything such as virtual lines would involve a stop in play. Again, you'll get no support on me for that.

The only extra human intervention I can think of is a sideline official in each half on both sides of the field to better keep up with the run of play.

Just remember, no matter what we can do, don't for one moment think that we can ever have perfection.

 

[GongPanther]

Interesting comment by Andrew Voss in his weekly column on the NRL's website regarding forward passes -

Thing is,that wouldn't have helped in this instance as the linesman,if you carefully observe,stopped dead in his tracks which makes me think that he alerted the ref,but he over ruled and allowed play to go on.

And BTW,why do they have replay technology in cricket games were they determine the projected course of a cricket ball? The same kind of technology could be applied in League.

Anyway,it's split milk as far as I'm concerned.Just hope the Easts supporters will be as vocal when they get TAB rorted.

 

[ACTPanthers]

Don't get me wrong, it was a shit decision and should've been called, but the fact of the matter is, it wasn't. As numerous posters have already stated, this type of thing happens weekly, and to all teams at some time or another - It was forward, but there's no point getting our panties in a bunch because the same thing will happen again this round.

 

[adamkungl]

"I don't want to go to the video to check on forward passes. We tried that before and it was a disaster."

I just don't get how people keep saying this... it's like forward passes exist in this magical vacuum where scrutiny is applied well beyond anything else. We tried once and it was bad so we should never try again in different ways? Wtf.

Video ref decisions aren't even applied the same as they were back then. The ref is required to make a call with clear evidence required to overturn. A flat ball is not clear evidence either way so the ref's decision will still stand unless it's a gridiron pass. If they can't be trusted to use it sensibly then they shouldn't be trusted with any other aspect of video refereeing in the first place.

Anyway having reviewed the final Roosters try I can confirm it was in fact a flat ball and everyone including myself was wrong.

 

[GongPanther]

"I don't want to go to the video to check on forward passes. We tried that before and it was a disaster."

As was quoted word for word from someone on Sterlo's program last night.

Unfortunately,when those within the discussion who tried to give an straight forward opinion,along comes Blocker Roach with his brain dead line that could have been muttered by a 10 year old about refs and OPSM,therefore killing off the serious nature of the issue.

But it is a worrying trend the amount of forward passes that have gone unchecked. Going to be a fun season.

 

[adamkungl]

Blocker in commentary teams is the real worrying trend

 

[Timmah]

"I don't want to go to the video to check on forward passes. We tried that before and it was a disaster."

I just don't get how people keep saying this... it's like forward passes exist in this magical vacuum where scrutiny is applied well beyond anything else. We tried once and it was bad so we should never try again in different ways? Wtf.

Video ref decisions aren't even applied the same as they were back then. The ref is required to make a call with clear evidence required to overturn. A flat ball is not clear evidence either way so the ref's decision will still stand unless it's a gridiron pass. If they can't be trusted to use it sensibly then they shouldn't be trusted with any other aspect of video refereeing in the first place.

Anyway having reviewed the final Roosters try I can confirm it was in fact a flat ball and everyone including myself was wrong.

The problem is that every single forward pass review will forever have the toss argued because of the endless chicken-egg debate around forward-out-of-hands vs forward trajectory.

 

[Captain Apollo]

The problem is that every single forward pass review will forever have the toss argued because of the endless chicken-egg debate around forward-out-of-hands vs forward trajectory.

Exactly. In terms of how the rule is enforced, referees are told to look at the player's hands as opposed to the trajectory of the ball. As it says in the notes to the Laws of the Game in Section 10 -

The direction of a pass is relative to the player making it and not to the actual path relative to the ground. A player running towards his opponents’ goal line may throw the ball towards a colleague who is behind him but because of the thrower’s own momentum the ball travels forward relative to the ground. This is not a forward pass as the thrower has not passed the ball forward in relation to himself. This is particularly noticeable when a running player makes a high, lobbed pass.