The Morrison "No Try"

[Walt Flanigan]

Sanity finally prevails!!!!!! You're dead right, some people seem to think that if there's even one percent doubt then instantly it's a try when that's just not the case. There was so much more evidence to say that it wasn't a try hence it was called a NO TRY!

Reverse the situtation and I'm sure you'd have a very different opinion. If there's doubt there's doubt and this one had it in buckets. No one saw the ball touch the ground and no one could say for sure that it didn't. So the video ref has made a call on something he couldn't see and that's wrong. Should've either been BOD or Ref's call.

 

[spider]

Does the pic show the ball touching the ground? Or just very close to it like the long shot did in the match?

I admit one shot made it look possible, but every other angle made it look as though Smith was under it at all times. Or is this photo from another angle altogether?

I was not able to watch the game yesterday - but todays picture shows the ball touching the ground for mine, no hand under it. Its on the back page of the Telegraph.

 

[sooperdooper]

i would say benfit of the doubt... how many other tries have we seen like this that get awarded?

 

[mickdo]

Sanity finally prevails!!!!!! You're dead right, some people seem to think that if there's even one percent doubt then instantly it's a try when that's just not the case. There was so much more evidence to say that it wasn't a try hence it was called a NO TRY!

like the ball on the line :roll:

 

[JoeD]

If they're going to have a crap rule like benefit of the doubt at least use it. Should have been a BOD try.

 

[MSIH]

The Daily Telegraph website http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/ is proclaiming that this photo shows that Morrison scored. I want what they're on.

 

[Michaelson]

Definately BOTD. In my view, that call was a perfect example of the type of pressure a completely one sided, and incredibly vocal crowd can bring to bear down on the officials.

We see the ball held up by Cameron Smith's (I think) leg initially, then the ball goes out of view, and when it comes back up it's cameron Smith's arm underneath it. In between there's no real telling what happened, but I thought there were indications Morrison got it down, particularly from the side on view. I think Parra were absolutely dudded on that call. In my view it is the epitome of a BOTD ruling.

 

[kia ora storm]

Dunno what the f**k goulds been eating...something hallucinogenic obviously.

No way on earth that try shouldve been benefit of the doubt...it was clear he didnt get it down, clear smiths arm was under it.
The video ref taking forever is whats got everyone in a spin :crazy:....clearly no try.
At least this time they got it right.

Agree...no try...Smith's arm was underneath the ball...good decision.;-)

 

[meltiger]

I thought it was the wrong decision at the time ...


Shouldn't have even been benefit of the doubt.

The still shots in this mornings Herald Sun clearly show the ball having been placed. It was the wrong decision.

 

[kia ora storm]

Definately BOTD. In my view, that call was a perfect example of the type of pressure a completely one sided, and incredibly vocal crowd can bring to bear down on the officials.

We see the ball held up by Cameron Smith's (I think) leg initially, then the ball goes out of view, and when it comes back up it's cameron Smith's arm underneath it. In between there's no real telling what happened, but I thought there were indications Morrison got it down, particularly from the side on view. I think Parra were absolutely dudded on that call. In my view it is the epitome of a BOTD ruling.

OMG...how can you rule it benefit of the doubt when it is not even conclusive...and don't bring the home crowd argument into it - it has no influence.:roll:

 

[meltiger]

The Daily Telegraph website http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/ is proclaiming that this photo shows that Morrison scored. I want what they're on.

There are two different photos in the Herald Sun and I assume the printed copy of the Telecrap. The first one is a shot of the ball on the defenders knee, the second shot CLEARLY shows the ball on the ground. If there is a hand underneath the ball in the second shot then the defenders hand is only about 1mm thick.


I hate Parrascum with a passion and most especially the disloyal, lying turd in question here ... But he scored. It was the wrong decision.

 

[spider]

yeah, the other photo on the back page shows the ball touching the ground.

 

[CliffyIsGod]

No try.

 

[Twizzle]

lol at everyone saying it was definatley not a try

have a look at the back page of the Telecrap, no doubt at all, it was a try

on the other hand the video refs didn't get to see this angle

too late to argue about it now, it history

 

[meltiger]

No try.

Do you base this on any factual evidence or just blowing smoke?


The photos in the papers clearly show the ball on the ground.

 

[CliffyIsGod]

Do you base this on any factual evidence or just blowing smoke?


The photos in the papers clearly show the ball on the ground.

I say this one the fact that Melbourne needed to win to keep Manly going. No try.

 

[meltiger]

I say this one the fact that Melbourne needed to win to keep Manly going. No try.

So you're talking sh!t in other words.


Manly are lucky. Had that try been awarded Parrascum would have won the game.

 

[CliffyIsGod]

Don't tell me your speculating there, meltiger...

 

[MSIH]

So you're talking sh!t in other words.


Manly are lucky. Had that try been awarded Parrascum would have won the game.

The only way Manly are lucky is the fact that Hampster's performance on Friday Night hasn't cost us a spot in the Final 6.

The decision yesterday slightly makes up for the sh*t we copped on friday.

 

[Jesfery]

One angle looked like he was held up, the other looked like he got it down at some stage. Surely that constitutes doubt!