Was it a try?

[Griffoshark66]

I'm not sure, but I reckon if it was Cronk/Slater, it's a green light.

 

[The.X.Factor9]

Are you talking about Wade Grahams knock on when he went to ground the ball ?

He really knows how to butcher a try...

 

[typicalfan]

The first half "forward pass" was a bit of a farce.

 

[Griffoshark66]

The first half "forward pass" was a bit of a farce.

True.

 

[innsaneink]

No try if its McRone/ Robinson.
Try if its Wallace/ Whatsisname
No try if its Walsh-Coont
Try if its Thursty Bowen
No try for Benji -- Timid

 

[Griffoshark66]

Are you talking about Wade Grahams knock on when he went to ground the ball ?

He really knows how to butcher a try...

Benefit of the doubt at worst. The dope in the box gave it away when he played it at normal speed at the end - Wade nearly punched it through the earth he had that much 'downward pressure'.

 

[roboshark]

The refs just guess these days on all decisions. Useless the lot of them

 

[East Coast Tiger]

For 100 years it was a try every time. These days, who the f**k knows.

 

[Liddell]

Are we all talking about the same try? If it's the Wade Graham one, the guy clearly knocked it on...

 

[andrew057]

It was no try, let's get real here.

 

[cleary89]

There was seperation ffs! Eeryong has the shits when he grounds it with his finger nail and they award it, this time he legitimately lost the ball....

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

If we aren't going to view the try attempt in slow motion, why bother having a video ref at all?

It was no try, unless basketball bounce tries are now fair dinkem.

 

[snoozer]

dunno.

don't feel ripped off, however would've taken it.

 

[Miller was a legend]

I would not have given it a green light.

 

[Jobdog]

There was seperation ffs! Eeryong has the shits when he grounds it with his finger nail and they award it, this time he legitimately lost the ball....

Correct. In one of the replays.

In another of the replays there was not.

In normal speed it was a try.

If it looks and quacks like a duck, yeah you know the rest.

 

[Danish]

Correct. In one of the replays.

In another of the replays there was not.

In normal speed it was a try.

If it looks and quacks like a duck, yeah you know the rest.

How many angles does it need to be shown as a clear knock on for you to say "no try"?

There was clear air between his hand and the ball. I don't see what the argument is to make it a try

 

[Kiwi]

I would not have given it a green light.

unless the roosters scored it.

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

unless the roosters scored it.

Yeah the guy with the Shark as his display picture is really gonna root for the team playing against his side.

You idiot.

 

[Lambretta]

I guess Danish because the separation only occurred in a single frame that was so blurred you couldnt tell if it was daylight or the effect of photography that gave the appearance of separation.

I have a rule where I try and see how I would have felt had my team been denied / awarded a try under the same circumstances.

Had that been the Roosters attempting the try I would have felt hard done by had the red light come up. Ergo, the same must be said for the Sharks.

Yes there was one frame that led to some doubt due to possible separation, but benefit to the attacking team means it should have been a try.

Still, we were denied a perfectly good try off a forward pass and the errors cancelled themselves. Draw was a fair result imo.

 

[Danish]

The one frame didn't lead to doubt. The one frame clearly showed the ball and his hand were separated.

That's not doubt. That's clear proof of a knock on.

If the same call had gone against us I'd be yelling abuse at the moron who couldn't catch a ball, not whining that close enough is good enough