The Bunker

[POPEYE]

Correct decision on the no try, dummy runners need to be picked who are not dummies, otherwise they'll always be outsmarted by the 'Milfords' of the game

 

[duck]

No try was the correct call but Milford should have been sent off for being such a dick.

 

[bileduct]

Another Luke Patten bunker f**k up overruling a referee decision with no conclusive evidence.

 

[catweasel]

Another Luke Patten bunker f**k up overruling a referee decision with no conclusive evidence.

We all know Patten is as biased as they come. He's got a wonky eye so he can't even see straight.

 

[Card Shark]

Another Luke Patten bunker f**k up overruling a referee decision with no conclusive evidence.

Is that the Austin (no) try?

The ref was in no position to make a call, he was chasing the play with the Dogs players & was 5m behind & his view would've been obscured.

I think the correct call was made, he was a few cm short.

 

[bileduct]

I think it would be charitable to call the guy biased, that would indicate some upstairs electrical activity. He has the intelligence of a potato.

 

[bileduct]

Is that the Austin (no) try?

The ref was in no position to make a call, he was chasing the play with the Dogs players & was 5m behind & his view would've been obscured.

Doesn't matter where the referee is. The rule is that the onfield referee has to make a call (there's four of them, ffs) and video ref can only overturn with conclusive evidence.

I think the correct call was made, he was a few cm short.

Replays don't show that. Patten made a guess.

 

[Card Shark]

I thought the side-on shot showed he was short.

 

[bileduct]

I thought the side-on shot showed he was short.

Nope. It was the front on angle that was used to make the decision.

Neither of them conclusively showed the ball either touching the line or falling short of it.

 

[El Diablo]

clearly a no try

correct decision

 

[catweasel]

clearly a no try

correct decision

Ref ruled try. Not enough evidence to overturn the decision. Bunker f**ked up again.

 

[Warriors Fever]

clearly a no try

correct decision

agree it looked to be a smidgen of green between the ball and line, if they called it a try I would have understood as well

 

[Apey]

It was obviously the correct call when they zoomed in on the front angle.

 

[myanonymoususername]

Ref ruled try. Not enough evidence to overturn the decision. Bunker f**ked up again.

Ref guessed try. Bunker counter-guessed no try.

 

[bileduct]

It was obviously the correct call when they zoomed in on the front angle.

No it wasn't.

 

[bileduct]

agree it looked to be a smidgen of green between the ball and line, if they called it a try I would have understood as well

How could you understand them calling it a try if you think it's conclusively not a try?

 

[nick87]

I've got no problem with the no try call on Austin
Call was try, replays clearly showed the ball short and lost. No try is the correct call


What I do have issue with is Patten sitting in a booth in Bulldogs games. He made the right call but it's a contentious one and it's just a bad look to have a 200 game veteran of a club refereeing that same club
Very easily avoided situation

 

[Warriors Fever]

How could you understand them calling it a try if you think it's conclusively not a try?

Because they often get these things wrong

 

[bileduct]

I've got no problem with the no try call on Austin
Call was try, replays clearly showed the ball short and lost.

No they don't.

 

[catweasel]

No they don't.

Yes they did.