*SPOILER* That kick-off...

[blacklock]

You're right. That would not be a 40/20, because the wording of the rules states that it must cross the touch line in the 20 metre zone. Merely passing over the plane of the 20 metre line is not enough in this case.

?
not to parse words...but for it to "cross the touch line" doesnt address whether it needs to touch the ground. crossing simply means going across it, be it in the air or ground.

by your logic... (and this is a wild hypothetical) if the ball is kicked long distance, bounces 25 metres out then goes over on the full 18 metres...its not a 40/20?? lol dont you see where that line of logic falls apart?

in that scenario the linesmen come running along and raise their flag at the 18m mark and the commentators talk about what an amazing kick it is they dont go back to see where it bounced first

 

[PinkPanther]

Just look at the shadow of the ball. It passed the 40m and then went out. Fair call.

 

[runatme]

Just look at the shadow of the ball. It passed the 40m and then went out. Fair call.

lol muppet

 

[wittyfan]

The ball never went 10 metres.

Anyone that says it did is either blind or mentally challenged.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

While it was close and the camera angle was not perfect, the ball appears (only slightly but quite clearly imo) to be at least in line with the 40 both on the full and after it bounces. On the balance of probabilities it looks about a 90/10 chance that it did go 10.

 

[ethan tremblay]

the best person with the view of the play was the touch judge accept the decision and move on without ref's we don't have a game so unless you can do a better job people should stop judging

 

[Cowboys woo]

It went 10 meters

Surprisd Flanagan didn't have a traditional post match whinge about the referees after a loss.

The officials just hate the sharks and Flanagan :lol:

 

[wittyfan]

It never went 10 metres. The "floating back" call is a load of codswallop.

 

[blacklock]

this picture clearly shows the ball over the 40. check it out. you can see both the ball and the shadow in relation to the 40 m line.

 

[carcharias]

this picture clearly shows the ball over the 40. check it out. you can see both the ball and the shadow in relation to the 40 m line.

You can't even see the ball

 

[blacklock]

You can't even see the ball

highlighted the ball...highlighted the shadow. its easier to see its position on the field without the highlights...but its def over the 40 and in the field of play (in that frame)


btw i felt the sharks are the better team. just being objective about the call

 

[innsaneink]

Bahaha youre delusional

this picture clearly shows the ball over the 40. check it out. you can see both the ball and the shadow in relation to the 40 m line.

ball was nowhere near where youve circled

 

[Didgi]

Just look at the shadow of the ball. It passed the 40m and then went out. Fair call.

:lol:

The ball never went 10 metres.

Anyone that says it did is either blind or mentally challenged.

:lol:

this picture clearly shows the ball over the 40. check it out. you can see both the ball and the shadow in relation to the 40 m line.

:lol:

ball was nowhere near where youve circled

:lol: Is everyone looking at thin air?

 

[blacklock]

Bahaha youre delusional



ball was nowhere near where youve circled

dude....its in the middle of the bloody circle. zoom in by clicking on the pic twice.

anyway we arent getting nobel prizes for proving or disproving the call. the result is done. onward and yadda yadda.

 

[Stinkler]

That camera angle shows nothing.

The issue is, the refs seem to have said the ball went 10m, then blew backwards.
Wow.

Badger is heard in the audio saying "didn't go 10".


There were 4 calls in the last 2 minutes that were 50/50 at best.
EVERY one of them went against the Sharks.

I can't remember the last time a 50/50 call has given the Sharks a win.
Plenty of times the 50/50 has denied them the win.

 

[skeepe]

?
not to parse words...but for it to "cross the touch line" doesnt address whether it needs to touch the ground. crossing simply means going across it, be it in the air or ground.

by your logic... (and this is a wild hypothetical) if the ball is kicked long distance, bounces 25 metres out then goes over on the full 18 metres...its not a 40/20?? lol dont you see where that line of logic falls apart?

in that scenario the linesmen come running along and raise their flag at the 18m mark and the commentators talk about what an amazing kick it is they dont go back to see where it bounced first

Did you fail comprehension a lot at school?

 

[carcharias]

Did you fail comprehension a lot at school?

The shadow theory made me laugh the most .

Forget that the players have about 4 shadows going different directions due to the flood lights.

 

[retch]

It never went 10 metres. The "floating back" call is a load of codswallop.

Just watched the video on Fox > downloaded it and played it in VLC player and pulled the play bar back and forward and I feel confident in saying this is correct.

 

[blacklock]

Did you fail comprehension a lot at school?

let me guess...every class you failed at school, the teacher favored the other students? get it?? get it?? hehe

look....the game is over, i have a life so i dont spend my time in every single game thread blaming the refs for why i tipped right or wrong. there hasnt been a single thread where you dont mention the refs. its sorta your "thing" in here.doesnt it get boring? dont you have a something better to be doing than whining over and over. youre becoming the boy who cried "bad call".

 

[blacklock]

The shadow theory made me laugh the most .

Forget that the players have about 4 shadows going different directions due to the flood lights.

well so long as you laughed mission accomplished hehe