Qld got some good decisions

[lockyrulz]

Oh, a gay joke. What a mature way to answer my query. I notice you still don't want to go near that OTHER camera angle which tells a different (and more accurate) story to the one you are bleating on about. If last nights' game was an episode of South Park then Hayne's boot would touch the line. But as it turns out, real life is 3-dimensional.

Blah blah.

More accurate my arse, even of it was a fair try, which I am far from convinced of, NSw scored off a forward pass later anyway.

In 2006 QLd had every decision go agaianst them and still won. Suck it up.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Oh, a gay joke. What a mature way to answer my query. I notice you still don't want to go near that OTHER camera angle which tells a different (and more accurate) story to the one you are bleating on about. If last nights' game was an episode of South Park then Hayne's boot would touch the line. But as it turns out, real life is 3-dimensional.

Has it ever crossed your mind that the OTHER camera angle was not from the same frame as the front angle. It's quite clear channel 9 production are still learning how to work the playback machine, as they couldn't even get the moment right on the Footy Show when his foot touched the sideline.

I would say the heel on the line is lost between frames on the rear shot. But guess what? It's there clear as day on the front angle. Unless of course you think Hayne has some mysterious condition where his foot looks flat when his heel is still off the ground. But hey anything can happen in this 3-dimensional world right?

He touched the line.

 

[drake]

Spot the similarity

I was watching the game last night with a German guy who had never seen League before. He looked at the screen and then asked "Why are the referees sponsered by the same company as Queensland?"

:shock:roll:

I said the same on the night...
QLD - lucky they're with AAMI, and so are the referees.

Conflict of Interest?

 

[Iafeta]

Oh, a gay joke. What a mature way to answer my query. I notice you still don't want to go near that OTHER camera angle which tells a different (and more accurate) story to the one you are bleating on about. If last nights' game was an episode of South Park then Hayne's boot would touch the line. But as it turns out, real life is 3-dimensional.

Gay joke? WTF?

 

[drake]

The argument of the number of penalties doesn't wash, sorry.

It's the timing and placement of bizarre penalties that raises eyebrows.

Penalty for 'taking out' Folau was 10 metres in front of the try line. 1 minute later, try.
Creagh gets penalised for playing the ball too quickly (??) when NSW are on a roll, 3 mins before half time. Momentum killed, QLD get the ball and wind the clock down.


QLD were far better in the first half, but a team consisting of so many Kangaroos does not need a helping hand friom the refs.

For the record, I'm not convinced either way about the Hayne no try, and could live with the descision.

 

[Charlie124]

Oh, a gay joke. What a mature way to answer my query. I notice you still don't want to go near that OTHER camera angle which tells a different (and more accurate) story to the one you are bleating on about. If last nights' game was an episode of South Park then Hayne's boot would touch the line. But as it turns out, real life is 3-dimensional.

:lol::lol: You just dont get it do you?

The fact is it doesnt matter how many different angles you can find of Hayne without his foot on the line, there could have been a camera following his feet around all night and captured 5000 shots of his foot not on a sideline. It means absolutely nothing because all that matters is the ONE shot of his foot on the line which we've all seen. A split second before or after that doesnt mean anything.

 

[Knightmare]

I think I do get it actually. You watch the motion replay from the front and his boot skews outwards from the ankle, appearing the touch the line. Watch the same sequence from behind though, and you see that Hayne's heel (which goes closest to the line) is in fact in the air and never touches the line.

 

[Daddycool]

Let me give you a tip....watch the game again. QLD were just too good. NSW had 80 mins to get over the top of them, but couldn't.

They're going through a bit of a purple patch at the moment. The NSW players are trying, but many of those Qld'ers will go down in history as greats of the game.

So, you've got to give the credit where it's due.

For the record though, my opinions are......

1. Hayne's try should have been awarded. There was no shot which definitively showed his foot on the line, thus it should have been B.O.D.
2. Creagh didn't get to his feet before trying to play it.....penalty.
3. Thaiday was at marker and therefore onside.

 

[moik]

Interesting .

 

[Mortar]

Interesting .

:lol:

 

[Red Bear]

They guy he 'took out' was 10 meters offside. Should have been a penalty allright, to QLD.

:roll:You cannot change your run to block a defender like that, it is not NFL.

I wasnt sure if he was offside or not, frankly i was at a club with a beer in hand, and as i said im not too fussed because we lost the game fairly and squarely. But there is no way you can block a defender in rugby league in that manner. Don't know why you have the apostraphies around took out cos he clearly took him out.

 

[lockyrulz]

:roll:You cannot change your run to block a defender like that, it is not NFL.

Nor can you be 10 meters offside.

I wasnt sure if he was offside or not

He was

we lost the game fairly and squarely.

You sure did.

But there is no way you can block a defender in rugby league in that manner.

If he wasn't 10 meters offside, he wouldn't have been in a position to be 'taken out'

 

[Knightmare]

I'm not singing "We waz robbed!" but I do think that if Hayne is awarded that try, the next 20 minutes of the game may have been quite different. You can go on saying that only bitter NSW fans are claiming it was a try, but where does that leave Wally, who also thought Hayne should have been awarded the 4 pointer?

 

[nibbs]

haynes foot brushed the chalk.