raiders no-try

[Raider_69]

i think jimmythehand needs to keep his hand off his jimmy
his hand NEVER left the footy and he applied downward pressure on the line, that is without a shadow of a doubt a try
we were screwed
The berrigan call had alot more doubt in it
Forget that fact schif had to kick from the sideline, he was denied the chance to push it toop extra time. But if we want to harp on about the kick and how he would of missed it, Schif is an 80% kicker. He was a good chance to kick it.

 

[lotm]

Yep no use as it's darn right foolish to predict the future over Berrigans decision but ok for every Raiders fan and his dog to predict that Schif would've slotted that conversion from the sideline with ease.

i didn't predict that, you self-righteous twat.

 

[legend]

Salivor, even my biased article refers to the fact Schif may have missed the kick and I'm willing to bet all Raiders fans would agree on that point and had we lost by two, then you wouldn't have heard a peep out of me. I'd be directing my rage elsewhere, not against the morons charged with running our game.

 

[Kiwi]

The replay clearly showed Hindmarsh pulled the ball from Webcke's grasp. Fair penalty.

Apparently though, the ref didn't see it with his own two eyes so it couldn't be a penalty. Not permitted to get a call from a touchie or video ref on this one, the ref had to see it.

 

[Roy Rover]

Bennett has his own view of the world. When he starts talking about 'the ground coming up' ?!?! Clearly he's not making any sense. That would have been awarded a try 99 times out of 100. The Raiders were very unlucky to say the least.

 

[jimmythehand]

does anyone know if or when the referees boss will make a comment on the no-try?

 

[Southern Rooster]

Bad luck Raiders.....there is no such thing as Benefit of Doubt going to the attacking side. It cost us agains Manly too when Soliola clearly grounded the ball yet was called held up at Ref's Call. Go Figure....

There is Bennet Fit of the doubt though and Brisbane got it on Saturday night.

 

[jimmythehand]

he he he

 

[aussies1st]

nice use of words there southern rooster

 

[Raider Ultra]

Shows that terrible inconsistency in the NRL when the Knights get a ridiculous try like on Saturday night, and the Raiders have a far more clear cut one ruled out.

 

[jimmythehand]

Well I didn't hear Finchy come out and say anything public about the Raiders no-try, I guess he must have thought like I did that it didn't need explaining!?

 

[aussies1st]

When does finchy ever admit his refs are wrong

 

[raiderette_robbo]

Thing was we've been in your position and I don't think we saw 5 topics or so dedicated to one reffing mistake.

Also it's not like everyone is 100% that Clint would've got the kick so whats all the fuss?

Canberra played well, nearly beat the top team in the comp. you should be proud of your team. However you choose not to and keep on whinging. Look on the brightside of things.

might i jus say not all of us are complaining...im really happy how we played on saturday, i still think it was a try, but its in the past...moving on...and learning from it

 

[jimmythehand]

When does finchy ever admit his refs are wrong

Quite a few times this year they've admitted they've got decisions wrong.

 

[aussies1st]

Well then as you said it was so obvious he didn't need to say anything about it

 

[jimmythehand]

yes it's in the past - but it's nice to know exactly what the rules and interpretations are for future reference.

 

[always a raider]

yes it is long over
but jimmy we know u thought it was a try otherwise u wouldnt have created thethread

 

[legend]

Finch would never admit the ref made a mistake in a Raiders game and the reasons for that are obvious.

 

[greeneyed]

I wouldn't think so. to "regain" something is to have possession of it. If you are touching something it does not mean you have possession of it.

This is why I made the point about it happening in general play. If someone loses it, and controls it by forcing it into the ground, then it is definitely a knock on because they did not regain possession before it hit the ground.

I'd probably agree that their should be an exception to this happening over the try line. But there is nothing in the rules to say that forcing the ball over the try-line constitutes regaining the ball. The law actually says once you have knocked on you have to have the ball BEFORE it hits the ground.

To all those that think he didn't knock the ball on it's irrelevant to the debate. Of course it's a try if he didn't knock the ball on to begin with.

On the basis of this ridiculous post, 3457 tries would not have been awarded by the video refs since their introduction.

 

[greeneyed]

Double post.