OT - OTHER GAMES 2022

[Ozzi_78]

the play had stopped.
they were challenging for a penalty for missed indiscretion.

I watched it and it just stopped because the tigers stopped assuming end of game. The challenge can only be made to “question” a call made by an official. There was no call as Butler didn’t make one. You can’t in general play challenge anything. You can only challenge a decision already made.

 

[shadowboxer]

Coach Angry reckons they got the rub of the green for once but the win was debatable.

Chad blames the touchie for the call allowing the cowboys to win the game.
Always the showman until it gets spicy.

Coach Angry also did say “In a couple of weeks people are going to not remember it.”

NRL at its finest

 

[Birdee_Num_Num]

I watched it and it just stopped because the tigers stopped assuming end of game. The challenge can only be made to “question” a call made by an official. There was no call as Butler didn’t make one. You can’t in general play challenge anything. You can only challenge a decision already made.

the decision would naturally have been to call time on the game from the ref.
that is a decision.

as soon as that occurs it's done.

you have to allow a challenge in that instance otherwise it completely flies in the face of what the challenge is about.

forget your bias on the result for the Sharks. If that was an out and out block of a runner, no questions and they called time with no challenge then everyone would be blowing up the otherway.

 

[DJDL]

This was the most glaring example of the lunacy of the challenge rule, but there were 2 or 3 others this weekend which, to me, were completely against what the rule states.

i.e. You can challenge the decision which was made - knock on, strip or whatever - not anything else in the lead up to the decision.

This weekend, as I said, I saw 2 or 3 other examples where the decision the referee had originally made was upheld, yet another minor indiscretion was picked up in the lead up and a penalty awarded to the challenging team.

It's an absolute farce and needs to be farked off post-haste.

 

[DJDL]

Oh and on the Tigers/Cows decision, the referee can be clearly seen and heard speaking to the bunker as soon as it happened and saying "Sorry, I can't hear you. What was that?". I thought the bunker was not allowed to interject. They are only there to act when called upon.

 

[Ozzi_78]

the decision would naturally have been to call time on the game from the ref.
that is a decision.

as soon as that occurs it's done.

you have to allow a challenge in that instance otherwise it completely flies in the face of what the challenge is about.

forget your bias on the result for the Sharks. If that was an out and out block of a runner, no questions and they called time with no challenge then everyone would be blowing up the otherway.

I’d be of the same opinion that they got it wrong even if it happened too the sharks. It’s a complete balls up num num. The game was finished there was no call made at all that allows a challenge. The players have to challenge a decision. Of which there was none.

It’s done now so will leave it at that.

 

[Craigshark]

Oh and on the Tigers/Cows decision, the referee can be clearly seen and heard speaking to the bunker as soon as it happened and saying "Sorry, I can't hear you. What was that?". I thought the bunker was not allowed to interject. They are only there to act when called upon.

didn’t interject last night when kikau blatantly shoulder charged tracey.. it’s a farce

 

[Birdee_Num_Num]

I’d be of the same opinion that they got it wrong even if it happened too the sharks. It’s a complete balls up num num. The game was finished there was no call made at all that allows a challenge. The players have to challenge a decision. Of which there was none.

It’s done now so will leave it at that.

for mine the end of the game has to be treated differently.
otherwise we run the risk of howlers going through to the keeper at the end of the game.

 

[Generalzod]

I didn’t realise it took a lifetime for 1 second to end…

 

[Frenzy.]

the decision would naturally have been to call time on the game from the ref.
that is a decision.

as soon as that occurs it's done.

you have to allow a challenge in that instance otherwise it completely flies in the face of what the challenge is about.

forget your bias on the result for the Sharks. If that was an out and out block of a runner, no questions and they called time with no challenge then everyone would be blowing up the otherway.

It was an out and out movement towards the "blocker" by Feldt with a very obvious dive. A real CAT act by Feldt. Makes it onto my CAT list now that fekker

 

[Generalzod]

How smug did the Cowboys players look after the match i hope the tigers do take action over this to wipe their smile of their face.

 

[toomuchsoup]

What a shocker of a call. It doesn’t just impact the tigers, it also impacts us, the broncos, the storm and everyone else vying for a spot in the top 4. Cowboys have turned heel

 

[Frenzy.]

Reports emerging that Butler had blown fulltime and that the Tigers are considering legal action.

 

[bad boy bubby]

Reports emerging that Butler had blown fulltime and that the Tigers are considering legal action.

There is a petition going on that is gaining rapidly

Sign the Petition

Have the result of the NRL Cowboys v Tigers result changed

www.change.org

 

[Generalzod]

Reports emerging that Butler had blown fulltime and that the Tigers are considering legal action.

'Got it wrong': Wests Tigers officials take action after NRL 'robbery'

The Wests Tigers are exploring their options to have the controversial result overturned. Read more here.

au.sports.yahoo.com

 

[DJDL]

Good luck with the legal challenge. I can't ever see a result being overturned.

At any rate, I still can't believe this decision. WTF were the Cowboys challenging? The decision to call held? The decision to call time out?

From the NRL website, posted 11 April after the debacle of teams deliberately giving away a penalty in order to challenge something else:

The NRL does not want the game to become like NFL, with constant stoppages to review each play, and the captain’s challenge is only permitted to contest a decision by the referee. They include:

• Offside - kick chase
• Re-start infringements
• Stealing the ball
• Foul play
• Obstruction
• Mid-air tackle

Incidents not detected by the match officials can't be challenged if there is no stoppage and players cannot deliberately force play to stop so they can call for a captain's challenge.

The only possible "in" is re-start infringements, but the line in bold says it all. You can't challenge something not detected.

f**k me, this sport is a joke at times.

 

[Stake Removed]

Good luck with the legal challenge. I can't ever see a result being overturned.

At any rate, I still can't believe this decision. WTF were the Cowboys challenging? The decision to call held? The decision to call time out?

From the NRL website, posted 11 April after the debacle of teams deliberately giving away a penalty in order to challenge something else:

The NRL does not want the game to become like NFL, with constant stoppages to review each play, and the captain’s challenge is only permitted to contest a decision by the referee. They include:

• Offside - kick chase
• Re-start infringements
• Stealing the ball
• Foul play
• Obstruction
• Mid-air tackle

Incidents not detected by the match officials can't be challenged if there is no stoppage and players cannot deliberately force play to stop so they can call for a captain's challenge.

The only possible "in" is re-start infringements, but the line in bold says it all. You can't challenge something not detected.

f**k me, this sport is a joke at times.

So a re start infringement, team A restarts with drop out, like Cleary did and found touch we could challenge that on risk saying he took the dropout in field of play not on goal line or before it.
Or team penalty kick for touch they always go over mark challenge it before the tap.
It's worth seeing what would happen.
The NRL is a joke it has been going this way for years, ongoing rule changes, no one actually knows what decision will be made.
Some players get charged some a particular fee it's just a fine.
It is so wrong

 

[Ozzi_78]

There is multiple things I see each week that I feel are a result of lazy officiating.

For example kicking for touch on the mark, kicking for conversion not aligned to the grounding of the ball and my most hated which is resetting a tap kick after a player took a quick tap with a player Infront - pretty sure that was a scrum to the other side once upon a time.

 

[Frenzy.]

The reponse from the NRL at the moment

But the NRL has already come out on the front foot with respect to the second matter, replying that the captain’s challenge is permissible in these circumstances, saying ‘although the referee had blown his whistle to stop the game after the last tackle was completed and time had expired, he had not yet called full-time.’

The NRL response continued, saying ‘the whole concept of the captain’s challenge is to make sure any decision by the referee that stops the game can be reviewed. To not do so would effectively deny a team the right to have an error corrected on the last play of the game just because time had expired.’

 

[Frenzy.]

Good luck with the legal challenge. I can't ever see a result being overturned.

At any rate, I still can't believe this decision. WTF were the Cowboys challenging? The decision to call held? The decision to call time out?

From the NRL website, posted 11 April after the debacle of teams deliberately giving away a penalty in order to challenge something else:

The NRL does not want the game to become like NFL, with constant stoppages to review each play, and the captain’s challenge is only permitted to contest a decision by the referee. They include:

• Offside - kick chase
• Re-start infringements
• Stealing the ball
• Foul play
• Obstruction
• Mid-air tackle

Incidents not detected by the match officials can't be challenged if there is no stoppage and players cannot deliberately force play to stop so they can call for a captain's challenge.

The only possible "in" is re-start infringements, but the line in bold says it all. You can't challenge something not detected.

f**k me, this sport is a joke at times.

The red concerns me in this case as Klein did detect it. So it is claimed. So did a touchie. So it is claimed
2 match officials. The qhunts have got it covered