Ref Watch 2014 (aka the Skeepe Thread)

[no name]

So the Roosters didnt score of that play?




Seems they did...

Of course they f**king did.
The fact is Topou was denied the chance to score.
Anything that happens after that is irrelevant to the professional foul debate.

 

[Y2Eel]

Of course they f**king did.
The fact is Topou was denied the chance to score.
Anything that happens after that is irrelevant to the professional foul debate.

So then the ref had 2 options allow the try to Jennings or call a penalty try and send Reynolds to the bin..

Its pretty simple really...

 

[Y2Eel]

On the Refs why did we have the 2 worst referees to ever run onto the Football field, take charge of the first 2 games of the season?

 

[no name]

So then the ref had 2 options allow the try to Jennings or call a penalty try and send Reynolds to the bin..

Its pretty simple really...

Why are they the only 2 options? Usually when a penalty try is given, no one goes to the bin.
The reason why it's a professional foul is that there is still doubt that Topou would have got there.
The fact that Jennings scores doesn't take away from the professional foul.
Anyway neither of us is going to change our minds so I'll leave my argument at that.

 

[Timmah]

I was *ok* with the refereeing (aside from the non-sinbin) on Thursday, but last night was woeful. The ruck interpretations were all over the place, inconsistent as hell and changed depending on the time of the game as well. Little things like PTB knock ons by the dummy half were missed after being well judged on Thursday as well.

All in all a frustrating night to watch footy, let alone support the Bulldogs. My biggest gripe? Not even against my team... why the F did the matchwinning try go upstairs? :|

 

[RufusRex]

McCulloch last night in an illegal act took a player out for the game yet was able to stay on the park and steer his team around for the win.

Refs are gutless and will not use the send off because 13 v 12 is not fair.

Just find a middle ground ... send a player off but allow him to be replaced .. keep the game 13 v 13 but the dismissed player can not enter the competition.

 

[RufusRex]

the inevitable arguement that a numpty could take out a playmaker deliberately .. well ... give the ref teh flexibility to dismiss with no sub or with a sub ...

 

[user_nat]

So as soon as anyone gets hit in a high tackle from someone like Thurston, they just need to fake concussion.

 

[RufusRex]

when a bloke is asleep before he hits the ground its a little different

 

[BigSteveo]

What the f**k are you on about?????
You are shifting the goalposts on every argument you make.

Reynolds is disciplined by the ref talking to him??? Really harsh penalty.

Why can't the ref bin Reynolds and still call a try?

And then you say in an 8 point try the offender is only 'penalised' once yet the try is given (your example of a 'penalty') and then the scoring team has an extra shot at goal (quite obviously a second 'penalty')


Enjoy your ass hat, without the condiments.

A referee warning a player is a form of disipline, whether you like it or not.

You are mistaking a penalty try with a potential 8 point try. An 8 point try is given because a try has been scored, regardless of the infringement. The penalty is given in addition to the 6 points on offer for the try. Penalty try is when a try was not scored because of an infringement which prevented the try in which the referee was certain that a try was going to be scored (the try is awarded between the posts). In that instance only 6 points is on offer.

Penalty try was not appropriate because a try was scored

 

[no name]

A referee warning a player is a form of disipline, whether you like it or not.

You are mistaking a penalty try with a potential 8 point try. An 8 point try is given because a try has been scored, regardless of the infringement. The penalty is given in addition to the 6 points on offer for the try. Penalty try is when a try was not scored because of an infringement which prevented the try in which the referee was certain that a try was going to be scored (the try is awarded between the posts). In that instance only 6 points is on offer.

Penalty try was not appropriate because a try was scored

I'm not confusing a penalty try with anything. I know what a penalty try is and I know what an 8 point try is.
I brought up the 8 point try to counter your argument that a player can't be penalised twice for the same offence.

Neither a penalty try or 8 point try should have been given because there was too much doubt about Topou scoring and he wasn't fouled while scoring or just after.
He was, however, denied the chance of scoring which is a professional foul.

 

[BigSteveo]

I brought up the 8 point try to counter your argument that a player can't be penalised twice for the same offence.

Neither a penalty try or 8 point try should have been given because there was too much doubt about Topou scoring and he wasn't fouled while scoring or just after.
He was, however, denied the chance of scoring which is a professional foul.

Tell me how in those situations a player is penalised twice for the same offence

Topou was denied the chance to score I agree, but the advantage was played and the try was scored anyway. Negating any professional foul.

 

[no name]

Your point was a player can't be penalised twice for the same offence.
By your definition a try being scored counts as a penalty

Yes correct. The player was not penalised because the referee allowed the advantage, in which a try is scored. Not an official penalty, but a penalty nonetheless. When you think of it, isn't been scored against a penalty of bad defence?

In an 8 point try the try is awarded and an extra kick at goal is a second penalty.

 

[BigSteveo]

Your point was a player can't be penalised twice for the same offence.
By your definition a try being scored counts as a penalty


In an 8 point try the try is awarded and an extra kick at goal is a second penalty.

How so? The penalty is the shot in front after the try scoring procedure is complete (try & conversion). Its totally independant to the try.

In my previous quote I meant that a penalty for allowing the try was not regarded as a penalty for the infringement, but rather a penalty for poor defense. I chose the wrong wording in that instance and I apologise for that confusion.

 

[El Diablo]

What a f**king disgusting decision. New season, same old shit.

Despicable dive by merkin Kidley rewarded.

Refs finally get the Knights over the line on the back of yet another in a f**kload of bullshit penalties.

Panthers lead 6-0.

 

[Sunshine Coast Tiger]

At the game I thought the refereeing in the Saints v Tigers game was very poor and very one sided. Having watched it again, I am still of that opinion. There is no way Saints should have won the penalty count by such a margin. It seems that the referees are still crap.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

How many times did they go to the video ref for the Parramatta v NZ game tonight?

 

[Timmah]

I believe only one try was directly awarded the whole night.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I can't remember the try, but it really pissed me off when Parra put up a bomb, and in the contest for the ball it's come down. The ref has ruled 6 again and then we've scored a try. The ref (after indicating that he thought it was no try) has then gone to the video ref to check the contest for the ball. The same contest he ruled 6 again for.

He made a call and then didn't back himself. They were f**king woeful tonight.

 

[pHyR3]

At the game I thought the refereeing in the Saints v Tigers game was very poor and very one sided. Having watched it again, I am still of that opinion. There is no way Saints should have won the penalty count by such a margin. It seems that the referees are still crap.

as a tiger's fan. Refs were ordinary, i've seen a lot worse though. Penalty count shoulda been in dragons favour, but not as much as it was.

Good video ref decisions though.