Wtf?????

[Kornstar]

Well Saints scored the biggest joke of a try last week versus the Knights, i just wish sometimes it would go our way, considering we have been robbed a few times this year, i would like to rob someone else just once!!!

Over the last few years though, Saints have got away with more than any other team, they continually throw forward passes and always get the 50/50 calls......i do not know how they haven't won a premiership with all the favouritism they receive!!!

 

[Macca_]

I think you misunderstand me:

* One of the experienced commentators thought it was a try, while another had doubts;

* Traditionally, the video ref will look at even the simplest decision about 6 times before making a decision.

Nope didn't misunderstand.

Just because the experienced commentator saw something that wasn't there doesn't mean there has to be some doubt. We have our own eyes as does the video ref As I said, I saw from the first shot of the grounding it was no try.

You're not saying that because on a number of other occassions there has been about 6 looks means he needs to be consistant and have 6 looks at it are you?

If he has 2 looks, see's it's no try, award no try. And the correct decision was made. It clearly was bounced and it only took 2 looks for him to see that. Nothing wrong there at all.

 

[number8]

OK, I've heard a lot about Jarryd's no try decision. But the following is what gets me:

Phil Gould himself said, after watching the replays, that he thought it was a try. Rabs wasn't sure, and Sterlo said no.

So, out of three observers, one said yes, one said no and the other was uncertain...

But the question I pose is this - exactly how many times did the video ref check it? I could only watch the macth on TV, so maybe they didn't show him checking it 5 or 6 times...But he only checked it twice on the coverage I saw...

Now, surely there was sufficient doubt to check it over and over and over again?

I think someone needs to watch the replay & crank the volume up.

Gould said only once "thats a try", & quickly changed his mind after seeing the 1st grounding replay. Rabbits said from the get go, "he dribbled the ball over the line" & Stelo sat on the fence until the grounding was replayed at which point all 3 were in agreement that it was a no try!

• The initial replay showed that all were onside. move on.
• The second replay showed what appeared to be no control in the grounding. further inspection.
• The 3rd was a another angle on the grounding but was inconlusive. move on.
• 4th showed the grounding from the front again & when slowed down it was obvious, it was a no try. end of story.

It was a no try. It was obvious after 2 of the 4 replays, & any more veiwings would have been uneccesary. All the commentry team were in agreeance on the issue. There is no controversy here........ what are you on? Watch it again...... Please!

 

[Tyler Durden]

But it infuriates me - the fact that there seemingly was enough doubt, and that he went againts "tradition" by looking at it twice and making the call.

It's not consistent.

so what ?

video ref had seen enough on 2 sightings to know it was clearly not a try.
should he look at 4 more angles to come up with the same decison ?

don't really care how many views they take, as long as they come up with the correct decision is made. that is the ultimate test.

 

[Utey]

As gone as I was I was sure it was no try.