The Bunker

[El Diablo]

The fact it took Patten 93 seconds to make a decision shows he had doubts too.

no it doesn't

 

[Walt Flanigan]

no it doesn't

Yes it does.

 

[POPEYE]

If all decisions were made at normal speed even an old dog like Patten couldn't have denied the referee, who incidentally was unsighted and a perfect example of why 'no try/try' should be abandoned . . . 'Born With A Whistle In My Mouth Klein' could have had no f**king idea where the ball landed

 

[Cloud]

Without trying to sound too childish, do people really think 'ole crosseyes could see straight?

 

[nick87]

No they don't.

I think looking at the replay with the high shot next to the side on shot, it showed conclusively he was short on the first grounding and lost it after that. That's how i saw it and appears how most who arent raiders fans saw it too, and that's how it was ruled.

Everyone's got an opinion, you're welcome to yours but i didnt see it that way at all.

Personally im just happy to see the team rally to over come this call and the Croker forward pass call instead of capitulating like we usually do when the team thinks they've been hard done by.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

TBH I don’t have a massive problem with it because to me it looked like it “probably” was short but at the same time I don’t think proper procedure was followed. I don’t think the footage was in any way conclusive, which is what is required to overturn the decision of the on-field ref.

I agree with Nick, Patten officiating Bulldogs games isn’t right.

 

[bileduct]

it showed conclusively he was short

No it didn't.

 

[nick87]

:lol: You keep saying that like it actually means something. Hot tip, it doesnt.

 

[bileduct]

:lol: You keep saying that like it actually means something. Hot tip, it doesnt.

Yes it does.

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

Personally im just happy to see the team rally to over come this call and the Croker forward pass call instead of capitulating like we usually do when the team thinks they've been hard done by.

that croker pass.
I mean, that was really harshly judged given the addo carr try this round and other trys this year etc

 

[nick87]

that croker pass.
I mean, that was really harshly judged given the addo carr try this round and other trys this year etc

That was a WAY worse call than the Austin one.
There was no excuse for it either, the ref was in a GREAT spot to make the right call.

 

[bileduct]

How can the Croker call be "WAY worse" than the Austin one when the Croker decision was correct?

 

[nick87]

So let me get this straight... You believe the Austin no try was the incorrect call and the Croker forward pass was the correct call?

Ok. Good luck with this guy, LU. Im done.

 

[bileduct]

Well Croker did throw a forward pass, and there was no conclusive evidence to overturn the Austin try.

So yeah. Got anything to prove otherwise?

 

[Card Shark]

I think looking at the replay with the high shot next to the side on shot, it showed conclusively he was short on the first grounding and lost it after that. That's how i saw it and appears how most who arent raiders fans saw it too, and that's how it was ruled.

Everyone's got an opinion, you're welcome to yours but i didnt see it that way at all.

Personally im just happy to see the team rally to over come this call and the Croker forward pass call instead of capitulating like we usually do when the team thinks they've been hard done by.

The Austin no-try was correct but you were robbed with the Croker call.

Good teams overcome bad calls & the Raiders did that emphatically.

 

[El Diablo]

How can the Croker call be "WAY worse" than the Austin one when the Croker decision was correct?

no it wasn't

 

[Card Shark]

TBH I don?t have a massive problem with it because to me it looked like it ?probably? was short but at the same time I don?t think proper procedure was followed. I don?t think the footage was in any way conclusive, which is what is required to overturn the decision of the on-field ref.

I agree with Nick, Patten officiating Bulldogs games isn?t right.

The ref was in a position where he was forced to guess try or no-try, by the "process".

The ref needs to be able to say to the video ref "my counterparts & I were unsighted, so please make the decision on what the video shows".

 

[Walt Flanigan]

The ref was in a position where he was forced to guess try or no-try, by the "process".

The ref needs to be able to say to the video ref "my counterparts & I were unsighted, so please make the decision on what the video shows".

That's true and I in no way approve of that process. But every team has been on the wrong end out it at some stage and it's a bit wrong for Patten to randomly decide he?ll ignore it. But like I said earlier, I don?t have a huge problem with the decision just how he came to it. I have a much bigger issue with the Croker no-try.

 

[bileduct]

The ref was in a position where he was forced to guess try or no-try, by the "process".

The ref needs to be able to say to the video ref "my counterparts & I were unsighted, so please make the decision on what the video shows".

So change the rule to that.

The fact is the rules weren't followed yet again.

 

[Card Shark]

So change the rule to that.

The fact is the rules weren't followed yet again.

In my opinion he dropped it before the line but the fact it took the video ref ages to come to a decision, he couldn't definitely say it wasn't a try...so by the letter of the law, yes he should've awarded it.