The double movement

[Arnold]

Better than last nights.

 

[glenmoresharkie]

100% double movement, there is no question about it. Everyone around me at the game was absolutely flabbergasted trying to work out how the actual f**k that was given a try.

Simply ridiculous. Would have been given no try last week

 

[Generalzod]

We go from week to week making up the rules as they go along....

 

[McLovin]

Shit call and didn't sit too well but take nothing away from the Raiders... They did to us what we've been doing to teams for the last 4 months. Hodgson was their Ennis. Dominated and controlled the ruck. We basically threw McIlwrick in the deep end against the team running 3rd.. Was never going to end well..

 

[kal83]

Agreed terrible call - could argue and say they had the rub of the green with the bunker decisions which contributed 12 points to their total. At the end of the day i think 30-14 was a fair reflection of the gap between the two sides on the day.

Very flat performance but I'd rather have it now then in the finals - loss has been coming for awhile.

 

[Card Shark]

I had a double movement this morning.

Did you stop & go again or did you have 2 bites of the cherry?

 

[2012....Sharks Year]

I had a double movement this morning.

Follow through??

 

[Card Shark]

Simply ridiculous. Would have been given no try last week

If there wasn't the uproar about last week, the bunker would've agreed with the ref & said no-try.

 

[shadowboxer]

The fact the front angle was not looked at was not a good look from a supporters point of view. Didn't change the game in the end, but deafinately put the nail in the coffin.
For mind I think he had momentum from Prior but from the front it didn't look good. They didn't muck around making a decision either, whereas on some of ours in the past it has taken them 5 minutes to make a decision.
However, I think back to the Parra game and one of those tries was a gift from the bunker.
Going forward, the NRL have plenty of worry with it. Spent a $$$$ on it but it is probally worse than before.

 

[eddiesmith]

What I don't understand about it and this is where Holmes f**ked up the other week, the momentum carried him into the in goal, yes, but he made a double movement to actually ground the ball, if he had let the momentum carry him and just grounded the ball, no issue. But he clearly made that 2nd movement, just because he was already in goal surely shouldn't count given their previous rulings?

Holmes the other week was a No Try for that reason, if he let momentum carry him it would have been fine and he would have scored but he had to make that 2nd movement and that's definitely no try.

But last night the bunker made no mention of the 2nd movement, just that momentum carried him into the in goal, no consistency indeed.

 

[Card Shark]

Holmes' body didn't end up in the in-goal.

 

[Weaponhead]

No consistency is the issue. The interpretation changes week to week providing no confidence for anyone in the game.

The Tits try on Monday had a decoy hit the outside shoulder of Maloney and the out the back pass was caught inside the decoy. These have both been part of the process for adjudication all season. In that instance both ignored. Last night inglis has a try disallowed for catching inside the decoy. Consistently inconsistent.

 

[Inferno]

Maybe there's weeks where everything is a try and the next week everything is a double movement.

And we just haven't been getting the memos.

 

[tom of poland]

I will have a look later but I was told last night that Austin was in the in goal area when he did his second movement, if this is true it is a fair try. Can someone check the replay?

I watch the Ch9 Footy Show segment on our game, Fittler claimed Austin was not over the try line and had a second go to get the ball down, therefore no try. The footage shown on the program supported Fitler's view.

 

[coolumsharkie]

The thing that annoyed me the most about this whole game was the refs letting the Raiders lie all over us... Watch the replay if you can stomach it, how many times the ref called held and then the Raiders would ignore it and turn us on our backs. Was a f**king travesty/.

 

[cb4]

This, like Holmes, was a no try.
Only difference is, the bunker made a mistake this week. Should have upheld the referee's decision.

 

[Card Shark]

Exactly.

Ref said no try & what evidence was there to suggest he got it down on the first attempt, as the 2nd was the double movement.

 

[Hawkins]

I was stunned it was not a penalty on the spot

 

[Card Shark]

I thought the Broncos 1 was a try but it wasn't given, so why should have this been given!

 

[cb4]

I was stunned it was not a penalty on the spot

Agreed. I thought it was clear cut.
We wouldn't have won the game, but it took any chance we had away.
Congrats on the game, please do the Storm over is weekend.