Look I don't think Melb necessarily deserved to win the game, but I do think they had some crucial calls go against them.
What I do think is funny, is how many people are claiming melb were crap and bris were great in game that there was a 7 point gap with most thinking there were 10 points under dispute in the game all against melb. I felt it was a very even game, I thought Brisbane defended very well and melb probably had the better of field position and threatened more often. Pretty even if you ask me.
On those calls, well I have watched the key ones back again.
1. Before we get into the main calls, I think the stuff about flops went both ways, at first I thought brisbane were very guilty but as the match went on I thought storm did their fair share. I do think storm had some cause for complaint about some of their guys getting pulled back down when they were in a good position to play the ball quick, players around the ankles slowing them down.
2. Now the big calls, well clearly the first main one, berrigan lost the ball. I watched it back and slater wouldn't have got far, brisbane had plenty of players to cover any counter, but 2 points to brisbane. This was a dud call but in the scheme of things not as big as the later ones.
3. The berrigan penalty. First and clearly it was a textbook shepherd, should have been a storm penalty. I'd also add that slater was very unlucky to be penalised for the high shot, its a bit rough being done for accidently clipping a guy who falls and you hit him at what would be about the hight of the sternum if that with an outstretched arm that would have been there to tackle berrigan legally at full height. I said to my friend at the time that it was a match turning decision at 8-8 in the 58th minute. Next set from the kick off they shouldn't have had brisbane score through a mix of skill and luck (come on over the head pass that hits the ground and bounces into lockyer's hands). Its a 6 point turn around.
4. The King no try, looked I have watched this back 10 times in super slow mo, and I have no idea how harrigan got his decision. There is simply no real evidence that hoffman knocks on, what it does show is hodges arms always between hoffman and the ball. hoffman hits hodges arms, but there is no evidence to show he ever touch's the ball, all evidence suggest he didn't. I think it is clearly a melbourne try, but even the small amount if doubt should be a benefit of the doubt melb try. Add one more its clear hodges does touch it first even if it was suggested hoffman might have touched it (which I don't think he did), how did they come up with a brisbane play the ball? Hodges must knock it on into hoffman if he touches it. All in all it was a horrible decision, and really at 65 mins in such a tight game (there was 1 more point scored), it finalised the game.
The big calls were over a 7 min period, and they turned the match from an 8-8 game to basically a brisbane win, now maybe brisbane win anyway, but the bad decisions turned the match to them.
