Ref and Bunker Decisions

[Iamback]

If it's the KF try you're thinking of, I was surprised it wasn't scrutinised more closely. As you said, there was both momentum AND a promotion of the ball by extending the arm. I was at least a dozen beers deep by that stage, only thing I could suggest is that in their opinion he would have scored with momentum alone, not sure how far over the line the ball finished.

Mitch Kenny's for us on the weekend.

Black and White would have that not a try

 

[gerg]

Why not? Referees determine intent with almost everything. Penalty tries, double movements, playing or not playing at the ball, high shots, foul play…..the list goes on.

The problem with black and white is you’re gonna get players like that parra neville hiding behind opposition players and waving their arms about Mitch Moses style every time a break is made or a try is scored.

I'm assuming you're a Manly supporter?

And it's only a matter of time before your team would get dudded by any new interpretation. Far easier to make a quick decision now. Did an attacking player stop in the defensive line? Yes. Obstruction and let's get on with the game.

Don't you remember the absolute cluster that the obstruction rule / interpretation was a few years back. Bunker would look at something for 4 or 5 minutes and come up with a ridiculous decision.
Rugby league fans have worse memories than goldfish. Can only remember the previous weekend where they think their team got dudded.

 

[Iamback]

I'm assuming you're a Manly supporter?

And it's only a matter of time before your team would get dudded by any new interpretation. Far easier to make a quick decision now. Did an attacking player stop in the defensive line? Yes. Obstruction and let's get on with the game.

Don't you remember the absolute cluster that the obstruction rule / interpretation was a few years back. Bunker would look at something for 4 or 5 minutes and come up with a ridiculous decision.
Rugby league fans have worse memories than goldfish. Can only remember the previous weekend where they think their team got dudded.

I am not. I hate both teams and feel the same, I want players making an effort not playing for ref calls

 

[Munky]

If in the 77th minute of a grand final in ridulously warm conditions a second rower can back pedal away from the play to ensure no obstruction in a try scoring situation then it should be easily doable in the regular season.

Maybe that's why Scott Sorensen is a three peat champ and Jake isn't.

 

[skeepe]

Mitch Kenny's for us on the weekend.

Black and White would have that not a try

It wasn't a try. Clear double movement.

 

[Iamback]

It wasn't a try. Clear double movement.

If it was Clear then it wouldn't be a try

 

[SBD82]

If it's the KF try you're thinking of, I was surprised it wasn't scrutinised more closely. As you said, there was both momentum AND a promotion of the ball by extending the arm. I was at least a dozen beers deep by that stage, only thing I could suggest is that in their opinion he would have scored with momentum alone, not sure how far over the line the ball finished.

Thanks mate. Interesting take.

Do you know if that’s a part of the rule book - that if momentum would have carried him he can reach out - or is it an interpretation?

 

[Vee]

Thanks mate. Interesting take.

Do you know if that’s a part of the rule book - that if momentum would have carried him he can reach out - or is it an interpretation?

Not part of the rule book. Been out of it for a while and given up trying to keep up with all their interpretations.

 

[Saxon]

If it was Clear then it wouldn't be a try

You haven't been watching the bunker lately, have you?

 

[Meth]

Why should Fat Jake be rewarded for being lazy and interfering with the line? It's a completely circular argument, and a pointless one, and ignored the fact that the rules state an obstruction occurs when a defender is denied an opportunity at making the tackle.

Jake stopped in the line. Moretti was denied any opportunity. Black, meet white.

Yes. I think at the time (in the match thread), I was howling for common sense etc, but with the benefit of hindsight, that's a slippery slope. Jake's at fault. Correct call.

 

[Vee]

Big call to deny manu. I get what they're saying and I don't think jwh had any intention of obstruction, we wait for the next one to see if they're consistent.

I thought they were arguing the put-down, short initially with a bobble as he rolled over but rl, and refs in particular provide no end of surprises.

 

[Iamback]

Big call to deny manu. I get what they're saying and I don't think jwh had any intention of obstruction, we wait for the next one to see if they're consistent.

I thought they were arguing the put-down, short initially with a bobble as he rolled over but rl, and refs in particular provide no end of surprises.

It helped my team tonight but the rule is shit

 

[Pjf04b]

Why do they forensically examine obstructions but let obvious bounced balls go with just a cursory look?

 

[Vee]

Why do they forensically examine obstructions but let obvious bounced balls go with just a cursory look?

Phool's Gold. And also try-scoring situations.

 

[gerg]

Phool's Gold. And also try-scoring situations.

What's Phil Gould got to do with it Michael Ennis?

 

[T-Boon]

That was a very good decision by the bunker. Could easily have been missed. How dopey of that decoy runner. He just switched off and ruined a try play. It’s as if the decoys don’t know their simple job. Run decoy then make sure you are out of the way.

 

[Iamback]

That was a very good decision by the bunker. Could easily have been missed. How dopey of that decoy runner. He just switched off and ruined a try play. It’s as if the decoys don’t know their simple job. Run decoy then make sure you are out of the way.

It had no bearing on the try being scored

 

[Vee]

What's Phil Gould got to do with it Michael Ennis?

Not sure, I was 12 beers deep at the time. Likely I was thinking about Phool bagging rules and interpretations when they don't suit his agenda.

 

[Bazal]

It had no bearing on the try being scored

It's very clear that you don't understand the rule. That doesn't make it incorrect

 

[Iamback]

It's very clear that you don't understand the rule. That doesn't make it incorrect

I understand the purpose of the rule, I also understand players can't disappear and there will be contact as is the nature of RL. So a Black and White rule doesn't work