Question for Queensland fans!

[AuDragon]

Thurston kicked out and hit Williams in the head, a bit different in my book.
Even if Farah played at it, the dislodged ball then went forward off Inglis's arms, which is why the call is wrong.

Not when the defensive player plays at the ball. Whether it hits Inglis forearms or not is irrelevant, as is the direction the ball takes. It's essentially the same as a strip, or a player blocking a kick with his hands, the rule is play on!

And Grimsy, the penalty try ruling remark was in case GI hadn't grounded it. Should've made it clearer...

 

[simostorm]

Ok firstly, let's just make sure that there's no bitterness here between NSW and QLD fans. Congratulations Queensland, you won and lead the series 1-0 going into Suncorp for game II and odds are you'll take a 2-0 lead. You won last night, you were the better team and the better team won. The players gave it their all, always difused the bombs well, and had good chemistry between themselves.

Us NSW fans are not angry at you... rather we are not happy with the referee's call on the GI try.

The question that I'd like you guys to answer though, which has baffled me since last night, is do you think or believe that Robbie Farah actually played at the ball? I'm not saying whether or not GI should have been awarded a try or anything like that at all, just quite simply, do you think he played at the ball?

From my perspective, it didn't look like it. All I saw was Robbie running towards where the action was and his foot just happened to be where GI was, I didn't see him move it to interfere in the play or anything. It certainly wasn't of the calibur that Billy Slater and Jarryd Hayne got put on notice for (sliding in feet first).

Again, congrats on Game I victory, you guys were the better team!

I thought NSW were the better team.. in the first half and throughout all the second half..

Queensland simply had that sweeping play that clicked at the right time to send darius over which was really the key.. so i thought.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

I disagree. While NSW were making better metres on their sets and were clearly able to get out of the danger zone, their only points came from QLD errors off kicks. They were able to get down into QLD's red zone, but had to rely on Slater having an absolute dud night in the air.

Case in point being whenever they kicked to Tate's wing, he was all over it and shut it down immediately.

 

[Canard]

Who made that argument?

The OP of this very thread that you posted in.

 

[jimmee007]

Ive watched this that many times now, regardless if Farah is playing at the ball or not. (which is debateable) the ball then runs up inglis' arm and hits the ground again before he goes onto grounding it.

That is a knock on in any rulebook.

 

[age.s]

I love some NSW fans arguement, "there is no way Farah played at it in that split second!!"

"But Inglis definitely did in that split second!"

Even so only ONE of those things have to be true for it to be no try. That both are untrue is hugely implausible which is why it shouldn't have been given.

 

[broncos70]

whether it is dangerous or not kicking a ball out of a players hands in the in goal is a penalty try if he doesnt ground it. If G.I knocks on then it's a penalty try as the rule is about deliberately trying to stop the ball with your foot

 

[Bulldog Force]

whether it is dangerous or not kicking a ball out of a players hands in the in goal is a penalty try if he doesnt ground it. If G.I knocks on then it's a penalty try as the rule is about deliberately trying to stop the ball with your foot

But from what we saw, Farah didn't appear to play at it. That's what we're asking here. His foot just happened to be in the way, he didn't actually move his foot towards the ball.

 

[sputneek]

I've heard Queensland fans saying the game should be given to NSW cause of the bad call.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

I've heard Queensland fans saying the game should be given to NSW cause of the bad call.

The voices in your head don't count....

 

[Springs]

Not when the defensive player plays at the ball. Whether it hits Inglis forearms or not is irrelevant, as is the direction the ball takes. It's essentially the same as a strip, or a player blocking a kick with his hands, the rule is play on!

And Grimsy, the penalty try ruling remark was in case GI hadn't grounded it. Should've made it clearer...

If there is a strip and then it comes off the attacking player's hands or arms it is still a knock on, possibly a double knock on depending on what direction the ball went after the strip. Hitting Inglis's forearms and going forward consititutes a knock on.

I've heard Queensland fans saying the game should be given to NSW cause of the bad call.

Probably reasonable QLD fans who know a bad call when they see a (blatantly obvious) one.

I think QLD were still the better team and deserved to win, just that call was a disgrace and robbed NSW of the chance to win in the final seven minutes.

 

[Fire]

Who gives a f**k if it was a try or not.

 

[Slammin]

Farah played at it, dislodged it and off Inglis's arm who was not playing at it and then scored the try.

Farah had to though, it was instinctive. Done it myself many times where your last chance to stop the try is throwing your leg out quick. No malice intended, just an instinctive move to protect your try line.

The try is ugly but meh. That try didn't cause NSW to lose the game anyway.

 

[betcats]

Shut up thirdman, we've heard enough outta you!

 

[Slammin]

Didn't know Jennings was here

 

[Zoidberg]

History books say its a try

 

[Shorty]

I thought the Jennings send off was correct.
Everyone (including Gallen) was saying it's different in Origin, yes, it is, but they turn a blind eye....if someone blatantly goes in and throwing a wild superman punch it can hardly be ignored, it's not a good look.

Bird took Cronk past the horizontal....so I thought that was a fair call, but it could have gone either way.

The try/no try? I didn't like it, thought it was a knock on and NSW have every right to be effed off about that one.

 

[lockyrulz]

It was a try.

Its no different to a player stripping the ball. They play at it, its fair game, who ever land on it scores.

 

[Mr Fourex]

I thought it was a try last night, but in the interest of being objective and looking at some of the arguments typed out across the forum, I decided to have another look at it.

There is no way Farrah didn't play at the ball. He may look like a mong but no NRL player runs like that. He saw what was eventuating in front of him and he made a play at the ball with his foot.

Ergo......he kicked the ball out of Inglis's hands.

Subsequently the ball rebounded off Inglis's arm. Even the most adventurous of NSW fan can't honestly say that Inglis then played at the ball. The reaction time needed to pull off such a feat would mean GI could realisticly catch a bullet.

Video ref made the right call.......try time.

IMHO.

 

[Titanic]

It's a moot point but what if there hadn't been a video ref, what do you think the ref saw in real time? And would we be better off going with the ref's call and then having it played back a squillion times? Forget it and bring on game 2.

For the record it was a try, the official scorecard says so.