Finals Week 2 Discussion

[Dexter]

I thought penalty try was correct as well but I do wonder if that was the deciding try if the decision would have been different.

 

[Jeba]

I thought penalty try was correct as well but I do wonder if that was the deciding try if the decision would have been different.

Good point.

 

[Coxy]

Saw highlights this morning. No way was that a penalty try. Absolutely no guarantee he was going to score if the Raiders held off a fraction of a second longer to tackle him.

Just another shit decision from shit referees ruining shit games.

 

[Twiztid]

I was expecting a penalty and Thompson being binned for 10. I didn't think the play was close enough to be considered a penalty try. Plus Dugan had a very good chance to bring Inglis down.

I said above that Inglis was quiet. He was involved a lot more than I realised.

 

[Kaz]

The Raiders weren't bitching when it was called a penalty try.

 

[Broncoman]

Souths were far to good no one can deny that. They just killed them through the middle and cut them apart out wide and were never in any kind of serious trouble. Give Adam Reynolds a NSW jersey for 2013. I thought the penalty try wasn't a try I would've given a penalty to Souths as it wasn't certain that Inglis was going to score.

 

[Son Edo]

Saw highlights this morning. No way was that a penalty try. Absolutely no guarantee he was going to score if the Raiders held off a fraction of a second longer to tackle him.

Just another shit decision from shit referees ruining shit games.

I didn't think the refs were too bad in that game, in my opinion. Eitherway, the game was long over at that point and the decision wouldn't of had an effect on it.

 

[fredie]

I disagree. I thought penalty try was the correct call. Inglis would've been at least a couple of metres closer to the line if he was tackled when he had the ball and there's no doubt in my mind he would've scored.

If it was penalty + sin bin I wouldn't be complaining either. Either way!

anything could have happened . droped the ball . knock on. held up . striped . tripped over . exc- . it was not a penalty try period . stupid refs again. just hope none of this rubbish happens in the grand final, i was in shock that they gave it a penalty try

 

[Anonymous person]

Eitherway, the game was long over at that point and the decision wouldn't of had an effect on it.

If only that were the case in the cowboys game as well.

All year we've been saying that one of these days one of the blatantly wrong ref calls will cost someone an important match, and in 2 semi final matches this year we have already had at least 3 absolute howlers, 2-3 of which directly ruined any chance the cowboys had of winning.

It's disgraceful, and we all knew it was coming if the nrl didn't get a handle on things. They didn't, and unfortunately the cowboys paid the ultimate price. Here's hoping that it doesn't happen yet again in the remaining 3 matches.

 

[Dexter]

Except if it happens to Manly

 

[OXY-351]

To be a penalty try there has to be 100% certainty that they would score.

If this was taken to the letter of the law, then when would a penatly try ever be awarded? Unless a player actually scores, how can you ever be 100% certain that they would have scored.

Yes, Inglis could have dropped it, been tackled, been held up, fallen over etc, but the odds of him doing so given the situation were extremely low.

I'm happy with the decision. I'd hate to see it get to the situation where players are purposely fouling other players to stop them from scoring a try, even knowing they will more than likely get sin binned for it.

 

[Anonymous person]

Yes, Inglis could have dropped it, been tackled, been held up, fallen over etc, but the odds of him doing so given the situation were extremely low.

i dont think the odds of him being tackled were extremely low, given how easily and quickly he was tackled as it was.

 

[OXY-351]

i dont think the odds of him being tackled were extremely low, given how easily and quickly he was tackled as it was.

I'll be more specific for you .... being tackled in some way to stop him scoring the try. Ie, short of the line, held up over the line etc.

As it was, even being tackled early, Inglis' momentum still ended up taking him to the try line, and given the position the tackler was in to be able to make the tackle, the chance of him being able to hold Inglis up or force the ball loose were low.

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

Low, not non-existent, so therefore no penalty try

 

[OXY-351]

Low, not non-existent, so therefore no penalty try

In the context of examining something that didn't happen, when can it ever be said for certain that it would have occured?

Show me any penatly try in the history of the game were it could be said that a player would have conclusively scored had it not been for them being fouled.

 

[QUEENSLANDER]

In the context of examining something that didn't happen, when can it ever be said for certain that it would have occured?

Show me any penatly try in the history of the game were it could be said that a player would have conclusively scored had it not been for them being fouled.

Theres a big difference between other tries which have been awarded, such as the one in the grand final years back, where the guy was actually in the in goals when he was fouled, as opposed to this one, where he was still 5m out from the line, with the fullback in proximity.

Carney had more of an argument in origin 2 this year to get a penalty try as the ONLY thing that couldve prevented him from scoring was cronk taking him out. Inglis still had to get to the line and avoid fergusons tackle to score. To me, there is too much doubt.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

In the context of examining something that didn't happen, when can it ever be said for certain that it would have occured?

Show me any penatly try in the history of the game were it could be said that a player would have conclusively scored had it not been for them being fouled.

And the rules only say that it's a penalty try if, in the ref's opinion, a try would have been scored but for the infringement (or very similar wording to this) - not sure where the "certainty" aspect came from, although it seems to be tossed up a lot. Probably one of Bills excuses he used at one time which has come back to bite him on the backside.

 

[Dexter]

I agree with Oxy, there is no way the fullback would have touched Inglis and the only way Ferguson could have stopped him was to tackle early.

Inglis catches the ball he scores. To say he might not have is in the 2% range IMO about the same range as the Foran didn't touch the ball call which everyone agrees was wrong.


Penalty try

(d) the Referee may award a penalty try if, in his
opinion, a try would have been scored but for the
unfair play of the defending team. A penalty try is
awarded between the goal posts irrespective of
where the offence occurred.