Ref Watch 2014 (aka the Skeepe Thread)

[Different kind of Rabbit]

However, Maloney should not have been allowed to kick that last goal either. Refs have no f**king idea.

 

[cleary89]

lol. He was held. No try.

The bigger howler was when the ball hit the corner post before it was thrown back in for that last panthers try. Everyone missed that completely.

Too busy watching Zelezniak's feet.

When did it? DWZ caught the ball about a metre before it. When did it hit the post?

 

[Jaegerex]

Incorrect.

Corner post is still in play for the ball.

"If the ball is not in possession of a player and it makes contact with the corner post (eg from a kick) the ball will be deemed to be touch-in-goal."

Correct and I updated my post after checking, but glancing quickly at the highlights on the NRL site, the ball doesn't look like it touched the post anyhow. It may have touched it before the Panthers player gets hands on it but no angle gives a definitive answer in the hightlight clips, it doesn't touch it at all after he has it in his hands though.

 

[cleary89]

Seriously, watch it again. Ball touches the post and sits up before it's flicked back in. Should have been no try.

I can see why you think that, but for that 1 freeze frame it looks like it sits up then he has it in his hands, but from the other view he's 1m away from the post, no way it hits the post, bounces back 1m and then he throws it.

 

[nomis88]

Deadset try every day of the week.

No it wasn't, clearly no try.

 

[blaza88z]

I thought his momentum had stopped but the arm carrying the ball had not made contact with the ball, 50/50 call but if the ref had not called held then it's a fair try

 

[stormbati]

Seriously, watch it again. Ball touches the post and sits up before it's flicked back in. Should have been no try.

If True then that should've been disallowed. There were a tonne of replays and I didn't see that once. Probably concentrating on his feet.

 

[KeepingTheFaith]

Also I'm almost certain the only reason they were in that position was from SBW punching the ball out... Should've been a Penrith penalty... Karma

SBW punched the ball out at 12-all I thought and the Casty incident was 12-4.

 

[Different kind of Rabbit]

I can see why you think that, but for that 1 freeze frame it looks like it sits up then he has it in his hands, but from the other view he's 1m away from the post, no way it hits the post, bounces back 1m and then he throws it.

Just went and watched again. From front on it looks like it pops up off the corner post but yeah, you are right. It must touch his arm which is just obstructed by the corner post as well.

Fair try.

Bad luck roosters.

 

[MaxPower]

Both teams copped bad calls. The better team won.

 

[Pedro Morales Magonzales]

It looked like a try to me.

Unfortunately refereeing blunders are occuring every week.

Anthony Minichiello scored from a blatant forward pass last week against Souths.
Maloney converted the try.

That's 6 points the Roosters shouldn't have had in their 4 point win.

 

[Spot On]

Geez, clutching at straws now. It was a try. Try.

 

[Tommy Smith]

I'll sound biased.. but to me it was a clear try. He gave a penalty for a double movement when his arm was well clear of the ground.

But... we were still 12-4 ahead. Penrith earned that win. No doubt.

 

[Loose Cannon]

Guess what? The ball apparently doesn't have to hit the ground for a tackle to be completed. Who would have thought the referee could call "held" and that constitutes a tackle? :crazy:

 

[roostersrule2]

Guess what? The ball apparently doesn't have to hit the ground for a tackle to be completed. Who would have thought the referee could call "held" and that constitutes a tackle? :crazy:

He didn't call held.

Also, is it still classed as a double movement or is it just a play the ball?

 

[Scubby]

Guess what? The ball apparently doesn't have to hit the ground for a tackle to be completed. Who would have thought the referee could call "held" and that constitutes a tackle? :crazy:

But I just watched it back and the referee gave double movement and tapped his elbow. Under new rules if he is held it goes back to play the ball.

 

[Tommy Smith]

But he didn't call held... otherwise he would have instructed Casty to go back and play the ball as per the rules this year.

He ruled that his arm hit the ground. And penalised for a double movement accordingly.

It was a bad, crucial call which cost us an 18-4 lead.

But last year we would have been good enough to overcome it. Today we weren't, and Penrith stepped up brilliantly.

Would you want any other team to play for your life in a field goal situation with Soward and Moylan? I doubt it.

 

[innsaneink]

But he didn't call held... otherwise he would have instructed Casty to go back and play the ball as per the rules this year.

He ruled that his arm hit the ground. And penalised for a double movement accordingly.

It was a bad, crucial call which cost us an 18-4 lead.

But last year we would have been good enough to overcome it. Today we weren't, and Penrith stepped up brilliantly.

Would you want any other team to play for your life in a field goal situation with Soward and Moylan? I doubt it.

sums it up

 

[Cheops]

The Panthers players only stopped because the ref called held. Was never going to be a try regardless of what the ref did. Penalty was probably harsh though

 

[Mr Spock!]

Clear double movement any day of the week.

Arm carrying the ball hit the ground.

The last Panthers try was fair as well. Miniciello's fault for taking it too easy.