Tigers will "sleep" on protest

[Kaz]

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,9032919-23209,00.html

March 21, 2004

South Sydney 17 bt Wests Tigers 16
THE last has not been heard of the longest game of the 2004 NRL season to date despite South Sydney running out winners over Wests Tigers at Aussie Stadium in the first golden point match of the year.

Wests Tigers chief executive Steve Noyce said it was likely the club would protest after match officials failed to stop the 10 minute extra-time period after five minutes.

When the game goes into a golden point period, teams are supposed to change ends after five minutes.

"We're going to sleep on it and make a decision in the morning," Noyce said.

Crucially, had referee Steve Lyons correctly halted play at halftime in extra time to ask the two teams to change ends, the Tigers would have received the ball from the ensuing kick-off.

Instead, Souths retained possession and advanced the play down deep into Wests territory, from which the Tigers were unable to recover before Willie Peters slotted the winning field goal from a subsequent set of six tackles.

But NRL chief operating officer Graham Annesley said it was not Lyons' fault and ruled out changing the result.

"The game is over, the result of the game doesn't change. That would be like saying if the referee made a refereeing error we could change the result of the game," he said.

The NRL will continue their investigations tomorrow but it is understood the failure to call halftime during the golden point period is due to a mix-up between the scoreboard attendant and the two time keepers – one from each club.

The gaffe provided a dramatic epilogue to a game that seemed to last forever as both teams traded nine field goal attempts before South Sydney halfback Peters – struggling with a virus all week – potted the match-winner with two and a half minutes left in extra-time.

Souths led 10-6 at halftime and 16-6 after 48 minutes only for Wests Tigers to pour on two tries in 15 minutes to lock up the match.

Both sides then put on a display of ordinary field goal kicking before Peters finally booted Souths home – much to his relief.

"I think I attempted about 20. My groin was a bit sore," laughed Peters who had been in doubt before the game with a virus.

"I did say to (teammate Jamie) Russo after I kicked terrible, I told him to take the next two but he didn't get them and then I was in the spot and fortunately it went through."

It wasn't just the Souths faithful that peppered the 11,293-strong crowd who were relieved with the gutsy win that opened the Rabbitohs' 2004 winning account.

"I would have been suicidal if we had lost that game – seriously," Souths coach Paul Langmack said.

"In round two last year we got beat in the last second by Brisbane ...and it affected our whole season.

"It's very important (the first win). Last year we were really competitive but at the end of the day you are here to win – if you aren't winning you start to doubt yourself."

Langmack dipped his hat to the recovering Peters, a barnstorming turn by Adam MacDougall and a Souths team spirit he said was typified by a 74th minute tackle by Rabbitohs lock Ashley Harrison.

Harrison latched onto Jason Moodie and put him into touch just as the Wests Tigers winger looked set to cross for the match-winner.

Langmack's only worry was skipper Fletcher (knee) and Brett Kearney (elbow).

To add injury to insult, Wests Tigers coach Tim Sheens said skipper Darren Senter (broken arm) could be out for 10 weeks.

Of the golden point period Sheens said: "I wasn't a fan of it (when it was introduced) and I'm not a fan now."

Once again the Tigers lived up to their tag as the Rabbitohs' "bunnies" – Souths only won three games last season, two of them against Wests.

Souths forward David Fa'alogo was put on report for a 32nd minute tackle on Tigers reserve Chris Heighington.

SOUTH SYDNEY 17 (A Harrison B Fletcher tries M Riddle 4 goals W Peters field goal) bt WESTS TIGERS 16 (J Moodie J Wilson B Reynolds tries B Hodgson 2 goals) at Aussie Stadium. Referee: S Lyons. Crowd: 11,293.

AAP

 

[meltiger]

But NRL chief operating officer Graham Annesley said it was not Lyons' fault and ruled out changing the result.

"The game is over, the result of the game doesn't change. That would be like saying if the referee made a refereeing error we could change the result of the game," he said.

Agree & disagree there ... Yes he is right and Wests can protest all they like - They won't get the result changed.


However, if the rule is you change ends after 5 minutes then very clearly it is the refs fault and theres a high probability the result could have gone the other way had the Tigers got the ball from a kick off.


Hopefully they do protest and ensure it never happens again in any game.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

It would be unfair to Souths to replay the match, it wasn't their fault.

But the people involved, including the referee should be sacked immediately. They either didn't know the rule or were engrossed in the match and forgot.

Either reason is unacceptable.

 

[Coastal Shark]

Just another example of the ineptitude of the officials from the weekend's fixtures. The decision in your game possibly cost you 2 points as did similar decisions in other games. #-o #-o

 

[meltiger]

It would be unfair to Souths to replay the match, it wasn't their fault.

But the people involved, including the referee should be sacked immediately. They either didn't know the rule or were engrossed in the match and forgot.

Either reason is unacceptable.

100% right on replaying the match and also that they should be sacked.

It would be unfair to Souths however there needs to be repurcussions because it's not as if it was something that was contentious like a forward pass.

 

[Junior Bunny]

But what about the disallowed Luke Macdougall try, that looked like a fair try to me. We were robbed the chance of beating your team comfortably.

How would have Souths kicking off give Wests a "high probability" of winning? For one, Souths were already going against the wind in the first half. And secondly, the team receiving the ball off the kick off is usually disadvanted because the other team would get better field position if the set of 6 was played normally. Why do you think Scott Sattler chose to kick off first?

Im not having a go at you guys, but Souths WERE the best team on the field yesterday and really deserved that win. Most of the time, the referee pendlum often swings against Souths and we get rorted aswell. I agree that the officials stuffed up badly, but the fact is neither team even remembered about switching sides, so both teams were still trying to win the game, and Souths made the most of it and kicked the field goal.

Surely you can see where this long suffering Rabbitohs supporter is coming from.

 

[Not so silent Bob]

Agreed. Souths were the better team on sunday.

But the ref should be sacked, and the timekeepers should have their watches turned sideways and shoved up their arses.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

But what about the disallowed Luke Macdougall try, that looked like a fair try to me. We were robbed the chance of beating your team comfortably.

How would have Souths kicking off give Wests a "high probability" of winning? For one, Souths were already going against the wind in the first half. And secondly, the team receiving the ball off the kick off is usually disadvanted because the other team would get better field position if the set of 6 was played normally. Why do you think Scott Sattler chose to kick off first?

Im not having a go at you guys, but Souths WERE the best team on the field yesterday and really deserved that win. Most of the time, the referee pendlum often swings against Souths and we get rorted aswell. I agree that the officials stuffed up badly, but the fact is neither team even remembered about switching sides, so both teams were still trying to win the game, and Souths made the most of it and kicked the field goal.

Surely you can see where this long suffering Rabbitohs supporter is coming from.

No worries as to who gets the points. But it's not like a missed forward pass or a bad refereeing decision. What happened was not an unfortunate error, it was a derelection of duty that just shouldn't happen, ever. When we have to worry about whether some idiot knows that extra time is 5 minutes each way and that he has to blow the hooter after 5 minutes, we're in deep shit.

Also, Wests would have received the kick off in the second half and Peters kicked the field goal into the wind. It's not exactly rocket science to figure out that if he could do it on the 5th attempt, Wests possibly could have too.

You got the points but we were ripped off, not by Souths or the Ref but by an incompetent drip who should be doing something else on the weekends.

And don't talk to a Wests supporter about being long suffering...

"robbed of the chance to beat Wests comfortably" ??

Give me a break.

 

[Junior Bunny]

No worries as to who gets the points. But it's not like a missed forward pass or a bad refereeing decision. What happened was not an unfortunate error, it was a derelection of duty that just shouldn't happen, ever. When we have to worry about whether some idiot knows that extra time is 5 minutes each way and that he has to blow the hooter after 5 minutes, we're in deep sh*t.

Also, Wests would have received the kick off in the second half and Peters kicked the field goal into the wind. It's not exactly rocket science to figure out that if he could do it on the 5th attempt, Wests possibly could have too.

You got the points but we were ripped off, not by Souths or the Ref but by an incompetent drip who should be doing something else on the weekends.

And don't talk to a Wests supporter about being long suffering...

"robbed of the chance to beat Wests comfortably" ??

Give me a break.

The score was 16-6 at the time, if that try was allowed it would have been at least 20-6, which I dont think the Wests Tigers could have come back from.

 

[simon says]

When it comes down to it,if it wasnt for a goal hitting the posts Souths wouldnt have been in the OT,so you can thank yer lucky stars.

 

[Trollhammaren]

But what about the disallowed Luke Macdougall try, that looked like a fair try to me. We were robbed the chance of beating your team comfortably.

How would have Souths kicking off give Wests a "high probability" of winning? For one, Souths were already going against the wind in the first half. And secondly, the team receiving the ball off the kick off is usually disadvanted because the other team would get better field position if the set of 6 was played normally. Why do you think Scott Sattler chose to kick off first?

Im not having a go at you guys, but Souths WERE the best team on the field yesterday and really deserved that win. Most of the time, the referee pendlum often swings against Souths and we get rorted aswell. I agree that the officials stuffed up badly, but the fact is neither team even remembered about switching sides, so both teams were still trying to win the game, and Souths made the most of it and kicked the field goal.

Surely you can see where this long suffering Rabbitohs supporter is coming from.

You were robbed? Pfft.... :roll:

That particular decision was sent to the video referee and adjudicated on. It could have gone either way but went with us. Robbed my arse. You know I think the wind robbed us of the game for Hodgson's kick hitting the up-right! :roll:

We were robbed at an opportunity of having possession and having an opportunity of winning. It's a lot harder to score when you're in defence. We weren't robbed of victory. No one is saying that. But we were robbed of an opportunity at victory!



PS. Was it freaking Lyons who called the "forward" pass in Canberra last season??

 

[Junior Bunny]

I thought you had the ball on the 5th minute mark? Wouldnt it be the exact same situation but on different ends, except this time Souths would have the wind?

Hodgson's kick missed because he didn't kick it right. The Luke Macdougall try was disallowed because of one man's desicion, that I think he got wrong.

You had your opportunity. I didnt see the Wests Tigers players stop trying, did you?

 

[tiger_nick]

No one will argue that Souths weren't the better team. No one will argue that the L MacDouggall try was 50/50 and we got lucky. BUT put yourself in our situation. How would you feel if Souths lost under those circumstances. And dont say you wouldnt get upset over it cause Souths fans are amongst the biggest whingers in the NRL. I wouldnt be surprised if you guys would organise a march to get your points!

And please spare me this 'long suffering Souths fan' bullshit. I wouldnt care if it was against you or the Panthers. So what because you have followed a recently unsuccessfull club you should get a special allowance? Why dont you start the game on 10 points? Ohh you have my sympathy!!!

Please mate thats just crap!

 

[Trollhammaren]

No one will argue that Souths weren't the better team. No one will argue that the L MacDouggall try was 50/50 and we got lucky. BUT put yourself in our situation. How would you feel if Souths lost under those circumstances. And dont say you wouldnt get upset over it cause Souths fans are amongst the biggest whingers in the NRL. I wouldnt be surprised if you guys would organise a march to get your points!
And please spare me this 'long suffering Souths fan' bullsh*t. I wouldnt care if it was against you or the Panthers. So what because you have followed a recently unsuccessfull club you should get a special allowance? Why dont you start the game on 10 points? Ohh you have my sympathy!!!

Please mate thats just crap!

hahahah

and junior bunny, on the 5th minute mark Scott Prince put a kick down into the corner which a Souths fielded and then made a gain up the field. You had the ball!

 

[Junior Bunny]

Yer sorry, I just watched the video of the match on the NRL website. We did have the ball, but i still think the result should and will stand.

10 points?? pffft I want 20!! We still wouldnt make the finals but at least we wouldnt get the spoon :lol:

BTW whingeing and organising a march was a much better option than merging :lol: :lol: :lol: