Video ref strikes again

[Stagger eel]

It was the wrong call mate.

I know, but that's beside the point..the point is that the call becomes the discretion of the officials and unfortunately it doesn't make it a right or wrong call.

 

[Stagger eel]

Sorry, but that is bullsh*t!!!! Did Witt end up over the line after the infringement???? No! He was about 4 metres off.....sorry, you could not be certain he was going to score!!!! If he ended up over the line, then fair enough, he probably would have scored BUT he was pulled down a fair bit before the line.......

you're missing the point..it's not about whether you and i being certain whether he can get across the line or not, it was clearly the discretion of the video ref to decide.

 

[strider]

you're missing the point..it's not about whether you and i being certain whether he can get across the line or not, it was clearly the discretion of the video ref to decide.

no - it was up to the video ref to decide if he would almost certainly have scored .... but he didn't even rule on that anyway .... he ruled that chad needs to be totally ignored - hance witty should have strolled over - and thats bullsh*t!

 

[Kornstar]

you're missing the point..it's not about whether you and i being certain whether he can get across the line or not, it was clearly the discretion of the video ref to decide.

100% agree with that, however, when the video ref thinks he is a celebrity and wants in the papers, why should we suffer?

Why wasn't Witt sin-binned for his attempt on Hayne? Ben Smith was sin-binned against Canberra for the same thing!!!! Witt wasn't even cautioned and Harrigan looked at it 100 times

 

[Stagger eel]

no - it was up to the video ref to decide if he would almost certainly have scored .... but he didn't even rule on that anyway .... he ruled that chad needs to be totally ignored - hance witty should have strolled over - and thats bullsh*t!

that's fine, but the ruling now sets a precedent for further decisions being made under similar circumstances and the problem that we have is that we probably won't see a situation similar to that for another 100 games, it's just the way it goes.

 

[strider]

why the hell are we always the bloody guinea pigs for a precendent?!?!?! :crazy: :crazy:

and like i said earlier - there should be a whole lot more penalty tries if the foul committer(s) need to be ignored ..... its a very dangerous precedent which opens itself to massive inconsistancy

 

[Stagger eel]

why the hell are we always the bloody guinea pigs for a precendent?!?!?! :crazy: :crazy:

and like i said earlier - there should be a whole lot more penalty tries if the foul committer(s) need to be ignored ..... its a very dangerous precedent

because that's the way the planets fall into line...;-)

God knows.

 

[spiderdan]

precedent in the nrl is a joke. every ruling on or off the field is so inconsistent.

looking back at it though i would rather the penalty try against us than a player in the bin in a close game with not long to go. maybe the penalty try wasn't such a bad ruling in the end.

 

[Seccie]

Attention grabbing moron...

BINGO !!!!!!!!!

 

[Kornstar]

Grahame (i hate the Eels) Hughes and Peter (Timmy can't play, i'm a broken record) Tunks think that it was fair......i wonder why ex-Bulldogs players would be against Parra, can't figure it out.....sometimes the bias on that radio station craps me off, even Blocker and co thought it was the wrong call.....and they are the biggest tools in the game (barring Brohman, he is good value and way too good for 2GB).

Hughes claims that he ended up over the line, therefore it was a penalty try, obviously Hughes had a cat nap somewhere during the game because Witt came about 4 metres away from the line when pulled down by Robbo.....Harrigan's excuse of having to rub Robbo out of it made alot more sense than Hughes' ridiculous "he ended up over line" call!!!!!

 

[Tizzun]

I was just watching the game and had a thought on why it took so many replays to give the Jarryd try. I think Billy was maybe thinking of giving us an 8 point try? Not that there was foul play but Witt did hold Jarryd back?

 

[strider]

I was just watching the game and had a thought on why it took so many replays to give the Jarryd try. I think Billy was maybe thinking of giving us an 8 point try? Not that there was foul play but Witt did hold Jarryd back?

thats not an 8 point try ... an 8pt try is only if something happens AFTER the try is scored

I have no idea what frickin dickless harrigan was looking for there - most likely any excuse to take it off us .... maybe jarryd farted - surely we can interpret that in a way to disallow the try

 

[Delboy]

AM I the only one that is finding Graham Hughes pro Dogs bias about everything ruining the show, from SBW to the salary cap his stand just reflects the Dogs. It is making it so difficult to listen to a sports show on the way home. he is becoming a joke in my eyes.

Somewhat rescued by MG, but Hughes is embarrassing at times, SBW should never be penalised, Corey Hughes is the best hooker in the game, and the Eels are useless, he should take some time off and consider what he does, maybe I am being critical but anyone who has me turning a sports show off does have issues.

 

[mickdo]

AM I the only one that is finding Graham Hughes pro Dogs bias about everything ruining the show, from SBW to the salary cap his stand just reflects the Dogs. It is making it so difficult to listen to a sports show on the way home. he is becoming a joke in my eyes.

Somewhat rescued by MG, but Hughes is embarrassing at times, SBW should never be penalised, Corey Hughes is the best hooker in the game, and the Eels are useless, he should take some time off and consider what he does, maybe I am being critical but anyone who has me turning a sports show off does have issues.

Agree totally. It's become the Bulldogs show with that git Tunks on there, and is torture to listen to, almost as bad as the continuous clown team. I just wish the ABC didn't have to cover the AFL. Hopefully the dog scum can get knocked out this weekend and we won't have to listen to any more sucking of their c**ks.

 

[spiderdan]

I was just watching the game and had a thought on why it took so many replays to give the Jarryd try. I think Billy was maybe thinking of giving us an 8 point try? Not that there was foul play but Witt did hold Jarryd back?

apparently he was asking the tv broadcast for a view from the other side (the one they showed after the try was scored) and they kept putting on the wrong shot. wasn't a case of him wanting to see 400 replays, just one from the other side which they couldn't get for him. apprently had hayne not grounded the ball properly he was going to consider a penalty try.