The Bunker

[Captain Apollo]

From the NRL's website -

Archer on Ese'ese no-try ruling
Fri 29 Jul, 2016, 2:30pm
NRL.com


NRL referees boss Tony Archer has confirmed the bunker made the correct call on the Herman Ese'ese no try in the Broncos' Round 21 Telstra Premiership clash with the Roosters at Allianz Stadium on Thursday night.

"The rules relating to this area of the game are that a try should be awarded if momentum of the tackled player carries him into the in goal. However, a tackled player should be penalised if he makes a second movement to place the ball over the line for a try," Archer told NRL.com.

Archer went on to say that a review of all angles showed that Ese'ese's arm carrying the ball touched the ground before the try line.

"Ese'ese then used his leg to push forward towards the tryline as well as promoting the ball over the defenders. Under the rule, this constitutes a second movement," he said.

"I understand people will debate this decision in regards to the momentum of the tackle, but the generating of the player's own momentum and promotion of the ball over a defender means that it is a no try."

 

[carcharias]

The wade Graham decision was different as it went against how they had been ruling obstruction all year i.e. The ball was caught on the outside shoulder. They instead changed it up to whether or not the contact caused Graham to be "denied a chance", which he was mostly based on the fact he simply stopped playing footy as soon as he contacted the decoy runner.

I complain about bunker decisions when I believ they go against the rules of the game. I never complain about "common sense" or for rules to be ignored.

I don't recall the exact goings on of that sharks game where I sat in front of you at shark park.... But I'm sure we were getting robbed blind

Oh now now
That obstruction was the same as it has been ruled all season.
And it is f**king geniused how a bloke can be dissalowed a try for that .
Good for my team
Only because it happened to us all year too.
Same as the double movement last night.
Myself and every commentator watching reckon it was a try .
The only ones I reckon they actually got right was the dropped balls while blokes are trying to score
You either put it down or you don't
You fumble the thing that badly that your only hope it that you get downward pressure from a fingernail is not try AFAIC.

 

[Timmah]

"Myself and every commentator" ≠ glowing endorsement...

 

[Pommy]

You talk like the video ref has never been used to overturn a double movement before.

I agree for the first 90 years of league it would likely have been a try (unless a ref decided to rule on the fly that his arm touched the ground, of course). This is because we didn't have the ability to review things and get them right. Lots of tries were scored for 90 years off dropped balls, offside players, and shepherds/obstructions too.

I guess you want all those to be allowed again too?

We've had video refs for almost 20 years, and they have been picking up minor infringements to deny tries ever since their deployment. In fact people called for video reviews to be introduced BECAUSE refs were missing these minor things and then replays would highlight them and call bloody murder that a wrong decision was made.

It's ridiculous to say that a referee should ignore the rules when reviewing a try, simply because in your opinion the breach was only "minor" or "didn't affect the play". These lead us straight down the path of inconsistent decisions, and inconsistency is the primary complaint that people have about the video review system.

I'm saying review every try in slow motion. Your the one who advocates the status quo we currently have.

 

[carcharias]

"Myself and every commentator" ≠ glowing endorsement...

Well they are not the ones trying to cover their arse in the bunker.
Of course Archie is gonna back the bunker
It's cost a bloody zillion bucks
As if they are going to admit it is shit
It's the desal plant of rugby league

 

[Timmah]

Well they are not the ones trying to cover their arse in the bunker.
Of course Archie is gonna back the bunker
It's cost a bloody zillion bucks
As if they are going to admit it is shit
It's the desal plant of rugby league

On the occasions they've got it wrong, they've come out and said so.

Just because you don't agree it doesn't mean it's wrong.

 

[bileduct]

Myself and every commentator watching reckon it was a try .

Is this supposed to mean something?

The commentary teams are full of idiots whose opinions are based on what they think the rule should be, not what it actually is.

 

[Card Shark]

Well they are not the ones trying to cover their arse in the bunker.
Of course Archie is gonna back the bunker
It's cost a bloody zillion bucks
As if they are going to admit it is shit
It's the desal plant of rugby league

Spot on.

The bunker is over playing their hand .

Stop looking at everything in f**king slow motion, especially double movements.

 

[ek999]

Actually the roosters player dragged him into the goal.
So he went with it.
Because he wasn't tackled at that point.

His arm doesn't land on the ground.
It skimmed the top of the grass for 1/10 of a poofteenth as he was getting rolled over.
If that is the rule then they need change the terminology because that was not what the double movement rule was invented for.

So hypothetically it's a Sharks v Bulldogs grand final. Sharks are up by 2 in the final minute but Bulldogs are on the attack. They send the ball out to the wing and Morris scores in the corner. On review by the bunker it shows that Morrs foot skims the line for 1/10 of a poofteenth before he got the ball down but they still rule it a try

Would you say Morris was in or would you complain about the Sharks being robbed?

 

[carcharias]

So hypothetically it's a Sharks v Bulldogs grand final. Sharks are up by 2 in the final minute but Bulldogs are on the attack. They send the ball out to the wing and Morris scores in the corner. On review by the bunker it shows that Morrs foot skims the line for 1/10 of a poofteenth before he got the ball down but they still rule it a try

Would you say Morris was in or would you complain about the Sharks being robbed?

Foot?

Out dickhead

 

[carcharias]

Is this supposed to mean something?

The commentary teams are full of idiots whose opinions are based on what they think the rule should be, not what it actually is.

Yeah
They are all wrong at the same time
It's always been a try
Suddenly it's bunker time and it's not???
Ha

 

[carcharias]

On the occasions they've got it wrong, they've come out and said so.

Just because you don't agree it doesn't mean it's wrong.

It's a try

Hope dogs lose tonight in the exact same fashion.

Then you'll work it out .

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

So hypothetically it's a Sharks v Bulldogs grand final. Sharks are up by 2 in the final minute but Bulldogs are on the attack. They send the ball out to the wing and Morris scores in the corner. On review by the bunker it shows that Morrs foot skims the line for 1/10 of a poofteenth before he got the ball down but they still rule it a try

Would you say Morris was in or would you complain about the Sharks being robbed?

Everyone would accept Morris was in, he could run over the ice cream seller in row 5 and get the green light based on past history.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

On the occasions they've got it wrong, they've come out and said so.

Just because you don't agree it doesn't mean it's wrong.

Please, give me a break.. Not even Tony Archer believes what he says. When Latrell Mitchell's try against Manly (what would have given the Roosters the lead with 5 to go) was disallowed, Tony Archer backed the decision. Both Fox and Channel 9 used grid technology which showed he was at least a foot onside. Tony Archer has zero impartiality.

It is like a police royal commission, where the police investigate themselves, the people at the top will always come out smelling like roses. If you want to properly assess the accuracy of the technology, you need to have someone or people who are 100% independent from the original process.

You would be the only person on the planet who believes what Tony Archer comes up with. I loved what Paul Green, a real straight shooter that i have massive respect for, calls Tony Archer, 'the minister for justification' and he doesn't just complain about rulings in his games, I heard him mention numerous other rulings, such as the Mitchell no try that he said he could not believe. I would back him over you any day.

 

[Sleep]

The bunker needs to take longer making decisions. I barely had time to cook dinner, have a shower and service my car during that last decision which was clear as f**king day.

Best of all, they still get plenty wrong. Such a waste of money. It's slowed the game down when one of the big points was that it'd would speed things up.

 

[Card Shark]

If Tony Archer thinks what he's teaching his video refs to disallow is ok, he's the worst thing to happen to rugby league since super league.

 

[Card Shark]

Best of all, they still get plenty wrong. Such a waste of money. It's slowed the game down when one of the big points was that it'd would speed things up.

Absolutely - why did we see the most decisive angle last...after it took 90 secs to decide what was always pretty obvious.

 

[bileduct]

Yeah
They are all wrong at the same time
It's always been a try
Suddenly it's bunker time and it's not???
Ha

Promoting the ball after the ball carrying arm touches the ground has always been a double movement.

 

[Timmah]

It's a try

Hope dogs lose tonight in the exact same fashion.

Then you'll work it out .

"Lose in the exact same fashion"

As who? Broncos had already lost when the decision was made.

 

[El Diablo]