Video Ref screws up 2 games

[mickdo]

Moffo, you are such a moron. Line markings??? Do you actually believe half the crap you come up with?

 

[El Diablo]

Secondly, Parras try late in the game was crap. The ball travelled forward from the 20 to the 19. Go watch the replay. Piss poor

Um, please explain how the ball could possibly travel forward from Langi (20) to Prince (19) if Prince was standing directly behind Langi? Reinventing the laws of motion are we? :lol:

Watch the replay. Both were moving towards the Newcastle try line and the 20 juggled it forward before the 19 took it. It WAS propelled forward. I don't wish to be arrogant, but you are WRONG.

And as for the Sing 'knock on'....tell me how the ball was propelled forward?????? Look at the BLOODY line markings

FFS

Moffo

Moff, I think you need your eyes checked and you should stop changing your story. First you said

Parras try late in the game was crap. The ball travelled forward from the 20 to the 19. Go watch the replay. Piss poor

Now that it's obvious to every man and his dog that it's impossible to pass forward to a man behind you, you seem to be saying there was another knock on :?

 

[Misty Bee]

While ther was a lot of line ball decisions to be made by Stone in the Langi try, There was no clear evience that he got it wrong. At best, it was a knok back.

Besides, after last weekends abortion by Stone at Lang Park, he bloody owed us.

 

[Agent Mulder]

Im trying not to biased but i believe the Langi try was fair...If you look at Langi and Prince you can see Langi seemed to knock it back to Prince.

Then look when Langi grounded the ball...If you look REAL close you can actually see the ball touch the line which is in fact a try.

But hey thats how i saw it.

 

[Iafeta]

Just a question on the last Parra try, did they check at all for offside? I thought from a brief look there was some serious doubts on that aspect of it.

 

[El Diablo]

They were both on side by a mile.

 

[Y2Eel]

Secondly, Parras try late in the game was crap. The ball travelled forward from the 20 to the 19. Go watch the replay. Piss poor

Moffo

can video refs call on forward passes??

 

[Moffo]

Moffo, you are such a moron. Line markings??? Do you actually believe half the crap you come up with?

Thanks Mickdo. I really couldn't give a f**k for what you have to say, but thanks anyway. You don't know what line markings are? Are you sure you are in the right forum??? Knitting forum is :arrow: way

El Duque - Let me clarify

the 20 caught the ball. He juggled it. At this stage, the 19 was behind him. Now, at the time between when the 20 last touched the ball and the 19 caught it, the ball travelled forward. The 20 pushed it forward whilst juggling it (and then the 19 subsequently caught it)

Of course the ball can still travel forward if the player is behind you. Thats a silly argument

Cheers,
Moffo

 

[Y2Eel]

#-o what i saw was that the 19 had to go backwards a step to catch the ball...

 

[Y2Eel]

it aslo depends if he threw the ball back to his sticks but it went forward due to his motion...

 

[Moffo]

Thats not how i saw it Y2Eel, but im happy to go back and watch it again

Cheeers,
Moffo

 

[El Diablo]

Of course the ball can still travel forward if the player is behind you. Thats a silly argument

We're not talking floated forward as in passes. Last night it was physically impossible.

 

[mickdo]

Finding it hard to come to terms with the shut out on Friday night Moffo? :lol:

 

[Moffo]

Of course the ball can still travel forward if the player is behind you. Thats a silly argument

We're not talking floated forward as in passes. Last night it was physically impossible.

Its not! If two players are running towards the opposing line (backs faced to the attacking line)...and one touches the ball, and the other player (whilst they are still both running ), catches the ball at a point closer to the opposing goal line...then the ball has travelled forward. It doesn't need to necessarily 'float' forward, the touch made it go forward

 

[El Diablo]

Of course the ball can still travel forward if the player is behind you. Thats a silly argument

We're not talking floated forward as in passes. Last night it was physically impossible.

Its not! If two players are running towards the opposing line (backs faced to the attacking line)...and one touches the ball, and the other player (whilst they are still both running ), catches the ball at a point closer to the opposing goal line...then the ball has travelled forward. It doesn't need to necessarily 'float' forward, the touch made it go forward

They were hardly running :roll:

 

[Moffo]

running/walking/hopping/skipping....same rule applies

 

[mickdo]

Must have found it really hard not being able to blame the refs on Friday night... :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Raider_69]

There was 2 controvesial decisions in the raiders game and they both were 50/50's

the first one was definatly right in IMO, had mcwilliams stood still i would have said try, but he followed through with the kick and added to the pressure of the situation

the second one was a very close one, with the green glasses on i recon it was right, but i wouldnt have complained too much had it gone the other way

 

[Anonymous]

The first, involved calling a Matt Sing play in the final seconds as a knock on. What a crock of sh*t, the ball travelled backwards, it did not go forward.

Well I don't think you've got to much support here Moffo. Looked like a clear knock-on to me. Sing was flying forward which made it look like the ball went backwards, but if you really watch closely, from when Sing touches it to when the ball hits the ground it has gone the best part of a metre forward.

 

[Anonymous]

Keeping in mind that passes are allowed to travel forward with momentum, but knock-ons are not.

I maintain that the worst video-ref decision of the week was the Bulldogs no try on Friday night.