Ref Watch 2014 (aka the Skeepe Thread)

[MaxPower]

Looks like he might have touched the ground in that gif. Anyway, you can see a penrith player standing right there who makes no attempt to tackle him, so it seems reasonable to believe the ref called held.

 

[Albert Rosenfeld]

If it was Sam Burgess they would be writing songs about how unbelievable a play it was. The fact that not a man in the commentary picked up on it - instead they just wanted to make fun of the fact he is foreign - was really telling of the bias being shown in the box. I assume Rabs had dropped some cash on te panthers

You are absolutely correct. The Channel 9 commentary team may never have visited a non-English speaking country. Either that, or they were just playing to the lowest common denominator in their audience.

 

[chrisD]

Topic was good for a laugh.

 

[Big Sam]

When an attacking player is tackled within easy reach of the goal line he should be penalised if he makes a second movement to place the ball over, or on, the line for a try.

Section 11, p.26:
http://www.nrl.com/portals/nrl/RadEditor/Documents/NRL Rules book 2013FINAL.pdf

Momentum stopped = tackled.

Learn the rules rorters.

 

[miguel de cervantes]

Looks like he might have touched the ground in that gif. Anyway, you can see a penrith player standing right there who makes no attempt to tackle him, so it seems reasonable to believe the ref called held.

For what it is worth, Remy stated on the phone to some guy on the french forum that he did not hear the referee call held.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

The great Frenchman stood up to play le ball, then saw the try line beckoning like a hot croissant and thought 'sacre bleu, I will place the ball over the line for my third NRL try'.

Unfortunately he broke the rules and it was ruled no try.

 

[lsta5838]

In the youtube clip, at about the 4 second mark, it looks like they hand touches the ground, but would need to look at it in better definition.

Rulebook: "When he is held by one or more opposing players and the ball or the hand or arm holding the ball comes into contact with the ground".

 

[Blues Riff]

"We won't be fooled again" :lol: Rooster fans going the full CSI to explain the loss.
Simple really. They were good. Panthers were just as good.
The difference - 3 kicks by Sir James Soward.
Stay tuned for the next enthralling episode.

 

[carcharias]

Looks like a try.
If he was called held, maybe the ref had to give a penalty
for double movement.
But
It looks a try to me.
See them award that all the time .

 

[Nealo 12]

Remy Casty, first Frenchman to be disallowed a try in a Qualifying Final.

Thats funny..... Poor old Albert probably choked on his frogs legs when it was given as a double movement !

 

[StormHi]

Stop marring the best game of the season so far with this tripe.

 

[soc123_au]

Momentum had stopped. The refs will go to the video at every chance, so it is fair to assume they thought he was held. As we know, held can be pretty discretionary when it comes to a refs interpretation on any given tackle. So no try.

As for the penalty, once the ball is promoted over the try line you can't ignore it and just go back to the mark & play it. I remember a game we played against Melbourne from memory, Jarrod Sammut was held up over the try line fully upright. He was thrashing like a fish trying to get free but not actualy getting anywhere. As the ref called held the defence let him go and he fell over & planted the ball. Melbourne got the penalty. It was impossible for the ball to have ended up anywhere other than the ingoal.

 

[cleary89]

Yup, just like if it was called held but passed it and it went out. Can't bring that back. Once he scores a try it's double movement.

 

[Danish]

If you aren't brought down then you have every right to keep moving forward until a referee calls you held. This never happened.

It was a refereeing howler no matter whether you think he was held or not as the ref never called it, but proceeded to punish the player for supposedly playing on anyway.

He also CLEARLY ruled it was a double movement because his elbow touched the ground. He tapped his elbow to explain his call after awarding the penalty. Replays clearly show the arm never came in contact with the ground

 

[cleary89]

Define brought down. Because most people would say being on your knees with momentum stopped would be brought down.

 

[soc123_au]

It is classed as a double movement regardless of the ball or arm hitting the ground. The Sammut one was the same call & the only time the ball or arms were near the ground were when he fell over.

If that had happened on halfway Remi would have been called back to play the ball on the mark. The reaction of the defenders as he was getting up looked like they thought he was going to play the ball.

 

[POPEYE]

Not that I care about spilt milk being examined if the ref thought the arm carrying the ball touched the ground it was a double movement, whether it did or not is beside the point. Has there been a discussion on Maloney's shot at goal yet

 

[God-King Dean]

There were a couple decisions that replays show Penrith should have got possession. These were glossed over, because Sydney ended up dropping it. If they had scored, we'd be banging on all week about how Panthers were robbed.

 

[Perth Red]

So the mantra of "if we have the technology we should use it" has been around for a number of years and the journey it has taken us on now sees players taking a dive for a penalty, players refusing to restart the games at scrums and drop outs until the video ref has seen the replay, players charging refs after a try demanding it be sent to the screen, refs afraid to make decisions on the most basic of decisions, excitement at grounds killed as we wait while the video ref takes 8 looks at a simple put down etc etc. The very fabric of the game we love has been tainted by the insidious creeping in of the video replay.

Is it time to say the video ref is a failure and dump it all together or at least par it back to only checking groundings of the ball for a try?Everything else the refs decide on at the time, coul we accep that refs will make errors and get it wrong occasionally? Could we convince the tV channels that we dont need to see a replay of every dropped ball or ref decision from 16 angles in super slo mo? Can we wrestle back the game of RL from being totally ruined by technology?

 

[some11]

Check for groundings, and if it takes you more than two viewings you get the sack.