Peachy try proven to be the correct decision

[Hawkins]

It was a knock on, I'm happy the Sea Eagles season in over and Brisbane are going to rape the Panthers over the weekend.

 

[Timmah]

No evidence? The finger bending back is the only evidence needed. The bunker are trained to look for finger movement in these situations. So how did they miss the finger bending back?

The finger bending back is not evidence lol. It's a blurry still taken on a potato camera phone and you're clinging to it for dear life.

Move on.

 

[broncojake91]

tough one that (testing)

 

[Danny-Boy]

The finger bending back is not evidence lol. It's a blurry still taken on a potato camera phone and you're clinging to it for dear life.

Move on.

Nothing to see here folks, just one of those freak human body occurrences that can only be put down to the act of Jesus. Also google earth in standard definition was used to zoom in on the play to determine the outcome of the decision.

 

[Timmah]

You're wrong Danny. Nothing more to it. You need to let go.

 

[Apey]

"It looks like a knock-on" is not a valid argument against the correctness of the call. Yeah, it's ugly, but he doesn't touch it with his hands. This call was correct and not even remotely controversial in my opinion.

 

[OldPanther]

No evidence? The finger bending back is the only evidence needed. The bunker are trained to look for finger movement in these situations. So how did they miss the finger bending back?

The double pictures are timed so you can see he isn't touching it in that moment with the finger movement. He very well could have touched his own leg. Insufficient evidence to overturn the decision. My last post on the topic.

 

[franklin2323]

Funnt that Panthers fans are the only ones that see zero issue with that being a try.

Well you need to touch it with your hands to be a knock on. What issue is there?

 

[franklin2323]

The double pictures are timed so you can see he isn't touching it in that moment with the finger movement. He very well could have touched his own leg. Insufficient evidence to overturn the decision. My last post on the topic.

That is the thing if his hand touches his leg the finger moves. Simple really

 

[isaiah]

"It looks like a knock-on" is not a valid argument against the correctness of the call. Yeah, it's ugly, but he doesn't touch it with his hands. This call was correct and not even remotely controversial in my opinion.

was there one off the knee like it nearly a decade ago in origin? Slater I believe

 

[Scaven]

In that case you'll still have the 50/50 calls people hate with the ref deciding whether it was played at or not.



No. People wanted the refs to be accountable. Now they want it changed because a correct decision went against them. We lost games to Cows and Rooster from bad calls. Swings and roundabouts.

The only thing that needs changed is the standard of the refs. Stop trying to remember all the players names and just remember the rules and apply them to everyone evenly.

Yeah I agree the standard of the refs need to be looked at, what is the answer though, throw more money at them?

I mean look at the NFL, it is virtually impossible that they come up with a howler due to technology etc.

 

[Scaven]

There was no evidence to suggest he did touch it, which was what was needed for the Bunker to overturn the referee's decision.

Based on the angles provided I cannot see where he conclusively touched it, so the try decision stands.


The rules are pretty clear tbh. You just don't like it when their application doesn't benefit your team.

Yes the rules are clear, but why should a team be rewarded for a ball bouncing off a chest or head, that is clearly a mistake and should be treated as such.

 

[OldPanther]

Yeah I agree the standard of the refs need to be looked at, what is the answer though, throw more money at them?

I mean look at the NFL, it is virtually impossible that they come up with a howler due to technology etc.

I think the systems in place now are ok the refs are just focused on the wrong things. They seem to be trying to manage the game to make an entertaining product rather than officiating.

What the refs should be:

Ref "number 12 stay out of it

Number 12 makes tackle

Ref blows penalty for offside

What actually happens

Ref "Hey Jimbo mate you're a little offside"

Player makes the tackle

Ref "Look buddy I hate to be a bother but you need to be onside"

Player does it again

Ref blows penalty "look that's 2 in a row mate I'm really sorry for the inconvenience.

Same applies to most ruck infringements etc.

The rest of the time they are trying to coach players.

 

[gUt]

Parramatta had genuine reasons to be pissed off with the refs but I don't see their fans on the net screaming.

I presume it's because they are all illiterate hicks with needles hanging out of their arms but still

 

[Scaven]

The double pictures are timed so you can see he isn't touching it in that moment with the finger movement. He very well could have touched his own leg. Insufficient evidence to overturn the decision. My last post on the topic.

How are they timed though, I really question how they can line these up to the exact frame.

 

[OldPanther]

How are they timed though, I really question how they can line these up to the exact frame.

Apparently they are time stamped or something.

 

[Card Shark]

I think in situations such as Peachey's, it should be benefit of the doubt to the defending team.

He took a swipe at the ball.

If it can't be determined that he definitely missed it (& in this case I don't think they could in reasonable time), No Try!

Same goes for bombs when a stack of hands go up for it. If you're contesting the ball & it's not conclusive that you didn't touch it....knock on,

 

[OldPanther]

I think in situations such as Peachey's, it should be benefit of the doubt to the defending team.

He took a swipe at the ball.

If it can't be determined that he definitely missed it (& in this case I don't think they could in reasonable time), No Try!

Same goes for bombs when a stack of hands go up for it. If you're contesting the ball & it's not conclusive that you didn't touch it....knock on,

For 100 years benifit of the doubt has gone to the attacking team. No reason to change it as a knee jerk reaction to one game.

 

[Card Shark]

For 100 years benifit of the doubt has gone to the attacking team. No reason to change it as a knee jerk reaction to one game.

I've thought this for a long time mate.

I hate how players go up for a bomb & 'cause they f**ked up & may have missed it, they get advantage.

 

[OldPanther]

I've thought this for a long time mate.

I hate how players go up for a bomb & 'cause they f**ked up & may have missed it, they get advantage.

That's fair we all have our gripes with the game.