Ricketsons Pass off the Ground

[TRANSLATION]

Lets for 1 minute forget that i hate your club. and talk football. If that is at all possible with most of you.

If Ricketsons pass which was given the green light is allowed to continue, should coaches instruct there players to Flop on top of players in fear of a offload that may lead to a try ?

The rule may state the arm carrying the ball blah , blah, blah, but that should only be for a Tryline decision.

If Rickos pass is allowed then Flops must also be allowed.

Right or Wrong ??

 

[melon....]

But it isnt just for tryline decisions StDildoman. You really need to learn the rules, learn a bit about the game, and then come back in 5 years or so when you have a basic grasp and talk league.

 

[TRANSLATION]

But it isnt just for tryline decisions StDildoman. You really need to learn the rules, learn a bit about the game, and then come back in 5 years or so when you have a basic grasp and talk league.

So your saying that it will be ok to jump on a guy that is on the ground, whilst tackled.???? FLOP...

And players should not be penalised.

Which one should it be ??

Don't run around the rule book.

 

[drake]

Ricko said last night on 2sm talkin sport that he had no idea what the rule was.
It was 50/50, i remember barrett getting penalised for a similar pass last year.
No big deal, shit decisions are made every week, and the roosters will be favoured, mostly because their the "better" team.
Melon, I know you have a screw loose when it comes to Dragons supporters in general and StGillaman in particular, but if it was, for example, Robbie Kearns who did it, you would have spewed.
Now imagine if it was Ryles and you would have swallowed your tongue. ;-)

 

[TRANSLATION]

Ricko said last night on 2sm talkin sport that he had no idea what the rule was.
It was 50/50, i remember barrett getting penalised for a similar pass last year.
No big deal, sh*t decisions are made every week, and the roosters will be favoured, mostly because their the "better" team.
Melon, I know you have a screw loose when it comes to Dragons supporters in general and StGillaman in particular, but if it was, for example, Robbie Kearns who did it, you would have spewed.
Now imagine if it was Ryles and you would have swallowed your tongue. ;-)

Drake they can not see past their red white and blue eyes. Its impossible for these imbeciles to comprehend that they continually get away with blue murder and favouritism

 

[drake]

Ricko said last night on 2sm talkin sport that he had no idea what the rule was.
It was 50/50, i remember barrett getting penalised for a similar pass last year.
No big deal, sh*t decisions are made every week, and the roosters will be favoured, mostly because their the "better" team.
Melon, I know you have a screw loose when it comes to Dragons supporters in general and StGillaman in particular, but if it was, for example, Robbie Kearns who did it, you would have spewed.
Now imagine if it was Ryles and you would have swallowed your tongue. ;-)

Drake they can not see past their red white and blue eyes. Its impossible for these imbeciles to comprehend that they continually get away with blue murder and favouritism

What I was trying to say is that Refs seem to subconsciously at least favour certain teams, usually the team considered 'better' on the day. I'm not saying that they got away with it 'cause Mr Beans boss' son is in the team, or that Mr Bean is frightened that he'll lose his spot (again) if he upsets bee sting face gould.
If I was a Melbourne fan I'd be spewing, but I hate the Storm more than I hate the chooks.
You can say the chooks are trying to buy a premiership, I say Melbourne were given one.

 

[TheEye]

Even if it was a 50-50 call (and by the absolute letter of the law it wasn't - even by your admission stgibberman).... isn't the attacking side supposed to get the benefit of the doubt?

 

[TRANSLATION]

Even if it was a 50-50 call (and by the absolute letter of the law it wasn't even by your admission stgibberman).... isn't the attacking side supposed to get the benefit of the doubt?

Read the 1st post Dildo. it's 50/50 to an idiot who has no idea on the game.

If this is allowed, WHY DO PLAYERS GET BUSTED FOR FLOPS.

FLOPS SHOULD BE ALLOWED THEN< UNTIL A REF CALLS HELD IF THIS IS ALLOWED. CAN U NOT SEE THIS ??????

Take those damn glasses off. :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[drake]

Benefit of the doubt only applies in video replays of tries.

 

[TheEye]

The rule may state the arm carrying the ball blah , blah, blah, but that should only be for a Tryline decision.

Who's the dildo?... this is the rule as posted on the other thread you started on this:

A player in possession is tackled:-
(a) 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.
(b) When he is held by one or more opposing players in such a manner that he can make no further progress and cannot part with the ball.
(c) When, being held by an opponent, the tackled player makes it evident that he has succumbed to the tackle and wishes to be released in order to play the ball
(d) When he is lying on the ground and an opponent places a hand on him.

None of these applied so play on.

I don't see any mention of this only applies for a tryline decision.

You disagree with the rule - fine. But go cry a river somewhere else.

[/b]

 

[TheEye]

FLOPS SHOULD BE ALLOWED THEN< UNTIL A REF CALLS HELD IF THIS IS ALLOWED. CAN U NOT SEE THIS ??????

Take those damn glasses off. :roll: :roll: :roll:[/quote]
How do you work that out?

A flop is only a flop if the player is tackled... he wasn't tackled at the point he passed the ball....1 second later and his arm touches the ground... he's tackled.

If a player came in at the exact time he passes the ball it's not a flop.

 

[TRANSLATION]

The rule may state the arm carrying the ball blah , blah, blah, but that should only be for a Tryline decision.

Who's the dildo?... this is the rule as posted on the other thread you started on this:

A player in possession is tackled:-
(a) 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.
(b) When he is held by one or more opposing players in such a manner that he can make no further progress and cannot part with the ball.
(c) When, being held by an opponent, the tackled player makes it evident that he has succumbed to the tackle and wishes to be released in order to play the ball
(d) When he is lying on the ground and an opponent places a hand on him.

None of these applied so play on.

I don't see any mention of this only applies for a tryline decision.

You disagree with the rule - fine. But go cry a river somewhere else.

[/b]

READ d) from those rules , For Gods sake you guys hang at the wall way too much. :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[melon....]

Ricko said last night on 2sm talkin sport that he had no idea what the rule was.
It was 50/50, i remember barrett getting penalised for a similar pass last year.
No big deal, sh*t decisions are made every week, and the roosters will be favoured, mostly because their the "better" team.
Melon, I know you have a screw loose when it comes to Dragons supporters in general and StGillaman in particular, but if it was, for example, Robbie Kearns who did it, you would have spewed.
Now imagine if it was Ryles and you would have swallowed your tongue. ;-)

Dont be so imbecilic. If Robbie Kearns did exactly the same thing whilst he was still in motion, with his arm not having touched the ground, thus making the tackle non effective, and he passed it, I would be still saying it was a fair pass. Granted it was 50/50. Yes I hate St.George, but my hatred doesnt blind me enough to stop calling it how I see it. Strangely the rule seems to support my opinion.....but you Drake, need to let go of it...leave the paranoia and fear to St.Egbertman.

 

[melon....]

But it isnt just for tryline decisions StDildoman. You really need to learn the rules, learn a bit about the game, and then come back in 5 years or so when you have a basic grasp and talk league.

So your saying that it will be ok to jump on a guy that is on the ground, whilst tackled.???? FLOP...

And players should not be penalised.

Which one should it be ??

Don't run around the rule book.

Read it again....I thought what I was saying was quite clear.

 

[TheEye]

lol - the only time he was lying on the ground was after he passed the ball....

 

[munro200]

Who cares about the Ricketson decision for the moment

What do you roosters supporters thnk about the Geyer No Try where Kidwell "alledgedly" pushed Minichello out of the way

My thoughts, is that Kidwell just put his hands on him, thats all. But you could say it is similar to No Try given in Origin Three where Kennedy took out Wesser

 

[TheEye]

soft decision - but again to the absolute letter of the law it was a correct decision.

 

[Kurt Sherlock's Mo]

Agreed, I wouldn't have been suprised to see a try but the Vidref was specfically asked by Hampstead if he saw a push , he saw one and called no try. If Kidwell had even only elbowed him out of the way, trytime. The moment he used his hands it was not meant to be.

As to the Ricko incident, I would say that if a Storm player had been in a position to "flop" on him before the pass was thrown he would have gone to wrap up the outstretched arms and it would not have been a penalty if the Ref could see Ricketson making to pass. But then again it's all speculation, "What if? what if?"

 

[Southern Rooster]

Who cares about the Ricketson decision for the moment

What do you roosters supporters thnk about the Geyer No Try where Kidwell "alledgedly" pushed Minichello out of the way

My thoughts, is that Kidwell just put his hands on him, thats all. But you could say it is similar to No Try given in Origin Three where Kennedy took out Wesser

Within the rules of the game it wasn't a try. But most people that follow league will say the rules need changing if a little touch like that deems a no try. Very soft but correct.

As for Ricketson's pass the problem I had with it was that Mr Bean didn't call held and let play go on. Now if he saw it as OK and didn't call held and let them play on. The video referee had no choice but to say TRY. Because if he didn't he would have been asked why did you say NO TRY when Hampstead has called play on and deemed it an incomplete tackle.
As far as the decision is concerned it is like the double movement law there are some you think are 50/50 and a decision either way wouldn't surprise and I think this was one of those situations.

It can be argued the Roosters got two 50/50 decisions go there way and you will get no arguments from me but as Shane Richardson so well put it yesterday. What goes around comes around and for years I used to lament the fact things didn't go our way in games. But now they are but I also know that it won't last.

 

[Big Poppa Pump]

Stgillaman, you forget we run the game. Our players are allowed to do that.