NRL officially docks 2 points over Bulldogs 14 players

[Non Terminator]

The two points in that situation Pass The Ball would mean a direct involvement of extra players, resulting in easy points loss, whereas I thought C'bury were trying to say the 14th man did not infringe the play.

 

[Timmah]

:lol: Penrith. Not only stupid but hypocritical... they said 48 hours ago they wouldn't pursue the points.

 

[Johns Magic]

I don't know how many :lol: :lol: posts I've seen from you lately, but it's all I see, either that or pointless anti-Sharks or anti-Roosters posts...

Believe it or not, that's the full extent of his wit.

 

[Gaba]

Believe it or not, that's the full extent of his wit.

Must have more then you , if you are following me around to see what i type

 

[Pass the Ball]

The two points in that situation Pass The Ball would mean a direct involvement of extra players, resulting in easy points loss, whereas I thought C'bury were trying to say the 14th man did not infringe the play.

Direct involvement, indirect involvement only creates grey areas...

Any more than 13 on the field is an infringement as far as I am concerned and should result in the two points being deducted...

Remember the swimming relay team that lost their medals(????) because they jumped into the pool at the wrong time. It did not change the outcome of the race but it was an infringement..

If you do not have to abide by the rules, then I ask, why have the rules..??

 

[Gaba]

I don't know how many :lol: :lol: posts I've seen from you lately, but it's all I see, either that or pointless anti-Sharks or anti-Roosters posts...

:lol:


Seriously if penrith would be declared the winners in a finals game, then i cant blame them for trying to get the points

 

[griffo346]

IMO penrith deserve the points farkin cheats

at the time we led the game and the 14th man lined up in attack

its so simple guys

 

[choc_soldier]

14 players on the field... it can be proven.

But how can it be proven that Penrith would have lost the match... very subjective.

 

[Timmah]

We would've scored the try irrespective of the 14 player debacle, given it occured in backplay and we kept moving forward.

I'm still wondering where the penalty was for Civoniceva's late hit on Ennis...

 

[Pass the Ball]

A little off topic - Did the bulldogs use all their interchanges or did they have some spare??

 

[typicalfan]

We would've scored the try irrespective of the 14 player debacle, given it occured in backplay and we kept moving forward.

I'm still wondering where the penalty was for Civoniceva's late hit on Ennis...

wasn't seen i guess, Ennis doesn't help himself lying down like a cat every time he gets nudged.

Got to cop the good with the bad mate thats rugby league, calls go for you and against you.

 

[mattyg]

from what i've seen Roberts came on as the 9th interchange player. Definately makes it more like the Broncos case with Ryan running back on. At least we didn't breach the 10 interchange rule I guess, then we'd probably stand no hope

 

[mxlegend99]

We would've scored the try irrespective of the 14 player debacle, given it occured in backplay and we kept moving forward.

I'm still wondering where the penalty was for Civoniceva's late hit on Ennis...

That hit wasn't late. There was no way Petero could have pulled out of that tackle. :roll:

The Bulldogs only had a chance to win that game because the Panthers had a fair try disallowed under the posts. The referee screwed up and penalised us even though he never called held. Had he not made that mistake, the game would have been well and truly over. We would have had a 10 point lead with about 4 minutes left and we would have been in possession of the ball.

But the referee saved the Bulldogs 6 points, and also awarded them a free penalty to get them off their own goal line. The Bulldogs then fielded an extra man... and scored while they had 14 players on the field. That made the scores level. Hazem El Masri then took over 2 minutes to kick his goal and not give the Panthers a chance.

The Panthers won't get the 2 points. There's no way the NRL will give it to them. But the Bulldogs definitely shouldn't get them back. The Panthers were the better team, and the Bulldogs came up with the match winning play with an extra player on the field.

 

[mxlegend99]

Here's a surprisingly well thought out comment by Matt Elliott:

Panthers coach Matthew Elliott said there was little doubt the extra player changed the result of the game.
"Our application is in support of the NRL's findings," Elliott said.
"If the video ref had been consulted and he knew there were 14 players on the field, what would have been the result? I'd say we would have got a penalty.
"If we kick the ball into touch from the penalty, two plays later the game would have been over.
"What we're saying is if you can go to the video ref two minutes after the game's finished, why can't you do it four days after the game's finished? What's the difference?"
The Bulldogs have until next week to lodge their appeal to retain the two points, with their submission set to be based on the punishment being excessive.

It's not going to change anything. There's no way that the NRL would change the result of the game. That would cause too many headaches.

 

[Apey]

Must have more then you , if you are following me around to see what i type

What does that have to do with wit?

 

[Garts]

Just saw it on NRL fox clearly for the first time. Dogs have little hope of keeping the 2 points. Ryan was 1st receiver on one side of the ruck when the dogs were attacking.

 

[ElectricEelMan]

Just saw it on NRL fox clearly for the first time. Dogs have little hope of keeping the 2 points. Ryan was 1st receiver on one side of the ruck when the dogs were attacking.

Agree. Ryan took at least one defender out of the line that could have helped stop Roberts from scoring. No wonder they had an overlap on that side of the field.

 

[Game_Breaker]

That hit wasn't late. There was no way Petero could have pulled out of that tackle. :roll:

The Bulldogs only had a chance to win that game because the Panthers had a fair try disallowed under the posts. The referee screwed up and penalised us even though he never called held. Had he not made that mistake, the game would have been well and truly over. We would have had a 10 point lead with about 4 minutes left and we would have been in possession of the ball.

But the referee saved the Bulldogs 6 points, and also awarded them a free penalty to get them off their own goal line. The Bulldogs then fielded an extra man... and scored while they had 14 players on the field. That made the scores level. Hazem El Masri then took over 2 minutes to kick his goal and not give the Panthers a chance.

The Panthers won't get the 2 points. There's no way the NRL will give it to them. But the Bulldogs definitely shouldn't get them back. The Panthers were the better team, and the Bulldogs came up with the match winning play with an extra player on the field.

You're like a broken record :crazy:

The ref did make a mistake by calling 2, but because he did the defence's effort in stopping Summut decreased.

So even if he didnt call 2, Sammut still wouldnt have scored


You lost, accept it.

 

[Caged Panther]

You're like a broken record :crazy:

The ref did make a mistake by calling 2, but because he did the defence's effort in stopping Summut decreased.

So even if he didnt call 2, Sammut still wouldnt have scored


You lost, accept it.

Sammut was already over the line and being held up off the ground by the defence when the ref called two, the only place he was ever going to go after the ref called two was on the ground in the in goal.

 

[Game_Breaker]

Sammut was already over the line and being held up off the ground by the defence when the ref called two, the only place he was ever going to go after the ref called two was on the ground in the in goal.

Exactly, he wasnt on the ground

Ref called 2, then the effort of the defence dropped, and sammut grounded the ball.

Refs shouldnt have called 2 so early, but thats not the Bulldogs fault