BuffaloRules
Coach
- Messages
- 15,595
:lol: f**king work it out! It's been common knowledge for what, a decade?, as to why they can't. f**k me.
Calm down!
I know they can't over rule presently, but my point is that they should be able to...
:lol: f**king work it out! It's been common knowledge for what, a decade?, as to why they can't. f**k me.
Calm down!
I know they can't over rule presently, but my point is that they should be able to...
It was a foot forward anyway
I thought the pass was forward, but Chicken legs hedged his bets by asking if it was touched.
VR can't rule on forward pass so because it went up try, should have stayed try.
On the Bulldogs forward pass:
The referee said it was a try on the condition that Parramatta had touched the ball. The video ref reviewed and said 'nope, they didn't' -> just because Rabs and Gus can't fathom that the referee sees it as forward if the Eels didn't touch it doesn't mean that scenario is inconceivable....
Hopefully for the sake of it being the same for all teams this never happens again. Once you go down this road it's just opening a can of worms. If you think it's forward you can still go to the video ref to check if the other team touched it. Just call it no try first.
Plenty wrong with the way it was handled. Cecchin didn't consult with the touchie until after the referral which was an error in itself. Regardless of what caveats he placed on it going upstairs as a try, it can't come back with a forward pass ruling. If he wanted that outcome it should have gone up with a no try ruling.
Either way, the side on angle shows it come backwards out of Kasiano's hands so the whole point is moot, the try should have been given. Cecchin stuffed up.
Well old Chicken legs shouldn't have sent it up at all.
You can't recall the referral once you've made it.
On the Bulldogs forward pass:
The referee said it was a try on the condition that Parramatta had touched the ball. The video ref reviewed and said 'nope, they didn't' -> just because Rabs and Gus can't fathom that the referee sees it as forward if the Eels didn't touch it doesn't mean that scenario is inconceivable....
Either way, the side on angle shows it come backwards out of Kasiano's hands so the whole point is moot, the try should have been given. Cecchin stuffed up.
The bunker went with the live touchies call that Feckin didn't hear and Feckin didn't even ask the touchie.
Feckin made a blew. Feckin is hopeless.
I remember last season in Round 16 when Souths played Manly and Gray scored from a pass that was a metre backwards.
Feckin went to the video ref and said I have no try, check on that forward pass please. I was lmao:lol::lol::lol::lol:
He already sent it up before consulting with his touch judge. That's the f**k up from the referee.
The only thing that changed was that it took longer to get to the decision that the touch judge originally made.
Just remembering while people are raging about the decision, the Bulldogs only had the ball there because Josh Reynolds got away with stripping it out of Semi's hands.
Plenty wrong with the way it was handled. Cecchin didn't consult with the touchie until after the referral which was an error in itself. Regardless of what caveats he placed on it going upstairs as a try, it can't come back with a forward pass ruling. If he wanted that outcome it should have gone up with a no try ruling.
Either way, the side on angle shows it come backwards out of Kasiano's hands so the whole point is moot, the try should have been given. Cecchin stuffed up.
That's not within the rules though. Once it gets sent to bunker, they cant rule on a forward pass period.