Why Can't the Video Ref Rule On a Forward Pass?

[El Diablo]

no

it's was tried before and was scrapped because it failed

 

[Card Shark]

Play would be stopped every single min for a Storm game to check how many forward passes the overrated Cam Smith threw

Exactly. Short passes from dummy half when the passer has no forward momentum are likely to be forward not the long passes thrown to a winger by a half running near full speed.

 

[The Engineers Room]

:lol:

This is so frustrating because the moment he laid hands in the winger that should be a penalty and yet they looked at it and surprise surprise no penalty!

If I was in the Eels side I would have ran next to one of the ball runners and tackled the Roosters defenders, apparently that is OK now.

 

[Card Shark]

This is so frustrating because the moment he laid hands in the winger that should be a penalty and yet they looked at it and surprise surprise no penalty!

If I was in the Eels side I would have ran next to one of the ball runners and tackled the Roosters defenders, apparently that is OK now.

Tyrone Peachey had what would've been a magic debut try disallowed because he put his hands on the defender in the pursuit of the ball.

I think his hands had little to do with the defender falling over but nevertheless he touched him, so penalty / no try was the correct decision .

Jennings touch was a lot softer than Peachey's though.

 

[Danish]

Jennings was knocked into the winger by a late shoulder charge by Sandow, not his fault.

Video refs need their power reduced, not increased. Right now they f**k up everything they have power over now, why give them more?

As for the forward pass, the correct ruling should have simply been offside. If the refs weren't so f**king stupid and one minded they'd have realised it

 

[[FKN-SIK]]

Touch judges just need to do their f**king jobs! Most of the time they look like they are there to make up the numbers

 

[Jason Maher]

Mind you, how different is it ruling that a pass has gone forward to trying to determine whether a dropped ball has gone forward?

 

[The Engineers Room]

Jennings was knocked into the winger by a late shoulder charge by Sandow, not his fault.

He clearly wrapped his arm around him and his hand hooked the winger.

 

[Apey]

Not sure about letting them do this but it'd be nice to have a common sense ruling (oh who am I kidding) for blatant forward passes like that.

 

[Jobdog]

Its all about camera angles. Sometimes, actually a lot of times what can look a forward pass on camera in reality is not.

Are we going to return to the horrid days of benefit of the doubt with tries.

100% agree. We'd have to have cameras on every 10m line. And even then you still wouldn't be able to tell for sure and certain whether a pass that looked forward actually was forward.

 

[The Engineers Room]

They need an accurate GPS style system so they can calculate the speed of the ball and an increase of velocity towards the goal line would mean forward pass. This is the only way.

 

[The.X.Factor9]

Nah... Blatant forward passes that get referred to the video ref scarcely occur, changing a rule for one of the greyest areas in RL is foolish and would probably come back to screw teams over in the long run.

 

[Eelementary]

Given the changes to the Benefit of the Doubt rule, it's time to look at this again.

Since the ref has already ruled a Try or No Try, 50/50 calls would remain unchanged.

It's an ugly look for the game when a very clear forward pass is replayed time and time again but the referee is forced to rule a Try due to an idiotic rule.

You know you scored off a forward pass that went to the video too, don't you?

 

[Eelementary]

Jennings was knocked into the winger by a late shoulder charge by Sandow, not his fault.

Video refs need their power reduced, not increased. Right now they f**k up everything they have power over now, why give them more?

As for the forward pass, the correct ruling should have simply been offside. If the refs weren't so f**king stupid and one minded they'd have realised it

FMD you lot are unbelievable - coming third, you win the game...And you still bitch and piss and moan worse than Eels fans.

 

[innsaneink]

Mind you, how different is it ruling that a pass has gone forward to trying to determine whether a dropped ball has gone forward?

Yep.
Plenty of knock on rulings look to go back and vice versa

We're looking for perfection, we wont get it.

Only Tony Carrolls U/10's get perfection

 

[Pugzley]

No. :roll:

Cameron Smith. Protected species.:roll:

 

[SaraSassypants]

No.

 

[Parra! *Clap Clap Clap*]

Dumb idea from a sore winner.

 

[kbw]

But Lussick got back onside before he touched it, that is what they were trying to rule. No doubt it wasn't a try but it was one of only maybe two decent calls Parra got all night. There were a lot of refereeing errors that turned the game the Roosters way and they didn't need the help.

The first couple of replays seemed to have Lussick well in front of Sandow, but then I agree with you one or 2 of the last replays showed Lussick getting back behind Sandow and reaching forward. He was not offside

On you other comment about Jennings though. He was pushed by Sandow causing him to make contact with the eels player. No "no try"

 

[kbw]

Touch judges just need to do their f**king jobs! Most of the time they look like they are there to make up the numbers

I agree