What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Ref and Bunker Decisions

Pjf04b

Juniors
Messages
515
Intent is or should be. Accidents happen in a game, In this case JWH wasn't looking or expecting the fullback here.

NRL has said it was a wrong call because he was through the defensive line.

Which is how it should be.
The NRL didn’t say it was wrong. Annesely said “in my opinion ……. they got it wrong“. So Annesely is now the NRL and what he says is Gospel?
 

Iamback

Referee
Messages
20,306
The NRL didn’t say it was wrong. Annesely said “in my opinion ……. they got it wrong“. So Annesely is now the NRL and what he says is Gospel?

He is the mouth piece for the NRL and their errors. He also backed the Turuva try which on the black and white rules should of been no try.

That says to me that he and the NRL feel there is room for some decisions in the grey area
 

GongPanther

Referee
Messages
28,676
The bunker knew they screwed up when they allowed the Roosters try before HT without checking it. That evened it up.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,854
Why are some people ignoring the fact the fullback was obstructed from being able to get across ?
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,854
Another good decision just now and another piece of horrific execution of a decoy run by a player. The players just look confused and I reckon coaches are just not preparing them by practicing decoys and drilling the rules into them.
 

kurt faulk

Coach
Messages
14,419
But you can see they were different incidents? Can’t you?

Yes, the panthers try was text book obstruction. The play they would put in the rule book to show video description of the rule.

How the video ref let it go after pinging the chickens on an obstruction 30m away from the play is perplexing.

.
 
Messages
4,310
Yes, the panthers try was text book obstruction. The play they would put in the rule book to show video description of the rule.

How the video ref let it go after pinging the chickens on an obstruction 30m away from the play is perplexing.

.
So, you CAN see how they are different then.
 

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,601
Been at work all day and now 13 beers deep, am I seeing things? Oates looks a yard offside, did I miss something?
 

beave

Coach
Messages
15,671
I wish we had the 3 main viewing/broadcast angles like the NFL (centre and each 2 yard line). It would aid the bunker immensely in making correct decisions but I acknowledge the pain in the ass it would be to facilitate it at all the grounds.
 
Last edited:
Messages
15,436
The NRL didn’t say it was wrong. Annesely said “in my opinion ……. they got it wrong“. So Annesely is now the NRL and what he says is Gospel?

As the "Head of football" when it comes to rule interpretations, the answer is yes. That is what his job entails.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MRN
Messages
15,436
What is the actual rule now with offside as far as feet placement goes?

What's the best resource for rules? I always feel like the resources are either out of date or not very specific.



 

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,601
@Vee

Can you give me some feedback on one of the North Qld tries against the Dragons on the weekend? (Kind of curious if I’m just being one eyed).

Cowboys player is tackled low. Arm carrying the ball hits the ground short of the line with tackler still connected. Momentum seems to be moving him forward as he turns over onto his front and extends his arm, all in one motion. He scores.

Double movement?
https://www.nrl.com/siteassets/operations/the-game/nrl-international-rules-book-2023.pdf

The rulebook is silent on what we call double movement. It must be in the interpretations, not sure where to find them.
 
Top