Game 3 - Post Match Discussion

[Anonymous person]

Meh, I don't think there was ever separation between his hand and the ball. Happy enough for it to be given a try, and I certainly don't want to see every video ref referral slowed down to super slow mo - thats just not the way our game should be officiated.

separation isnt the point. the point is that he pushed the ball down onto boyd, and had boyd not been there he would have bounced it almost instantly. he then rolls the ball back over boyds shoulder and grabs it.

 

[Jeba]

separation isnt the point. the point is that he pushed the ball down onto boyd, and had boyd not been there he would have bounced it almost instantly. he then rolls the ball back over boyds shoulder and grabs it.

Moot point. Boyd was there, he took advantage of it. Fair try.

 

[Coxy]

Yeah. Was just like the sharks 2 bomb tries last week. Undoubtedly the ball made contact with defenders so technically knock on. Interpretation is different these says

 

[Big Pete]

Rabs was trying to remember a rule before the try was awarded about the ball being rested on a player.

I wonder if it actually exists or not?

I was fine with it being a try by the way. Bit of doubt there but I still think he had a grip on it when he came into contact with Boyd. He used Boyd to strengthen the grip but never lost it entirely for mine.

 

[Kaz]

Rabs was trying to remember a rule before the try was awarded about the ball being rested on a player.

He can't even remember the players correct name, so no wonder he couldn't remember the rule.

 

[Force]

Rabs was trying to remember a rule before the try was awarded about the ball being rested on a player.

I wonder if it actually exists or not?

I was fine with it being a try by the way. Bit of doubt there but I still think he had a grip on it when he came into contact with Boyd. He used Boyd to strengthen the grip but never lost it entirely for mine.

To me Morris was in the process of gaining possession when it touched Boyd.He didnt have the ball before that point or at the very least it was a simultaneous action and he didnt lose control of the ball into Boyd so benefit of the doubt given.

 

[Anonymous person]

Moot point. Boyd was there, he took advantage of it. Fair try.

i dont think you understand the point if you think its moot. by the rule book, the way it has been for 100 years, its a knock on.

 

[Fozz]

No, it's a moot point arguing that if Boyd wasn't there then Morris would have knocked on because Boyd was there and we'd never know if Morris would have caught the ball in a different manner.

 

[Anonymous person]

No, it's a moot point arguing that if Boyd wasn't there then Morris would have knocked on because Boyd was there and we'd never know if Morris would have caught the ball in a different manner.

but again, its not moot because the fact that boyd was there made it a knock-on.....

how are people not getting this? this is another instance where the rules are clear cut, and say its a knock-on, but people are somehow disagreeing. waiting for "fabric of the game" comments to show their head.

oh no, that was the buzzword a few months ago, we're still on "spine" arent we? :p

 

[Coxy]

I've looked at it half a dozen times.I can't see a real Bobble. So you can't say for sure he needed boyd there to catch it. He probably did, but you can't say for sure.

I actually like Gus's philosophy on this. If it looks like a try it probably is. If you need to look at it 7, 8, 9 times after initially thinking try, then it should just be given.

Conversely if on first impression it didn't look like a try, and after 7, 8, 9 views you can't clearly say it is, disallow it.

Honestly, I reckon 99 times out of 100 you can decide once you've seen 2 angles.

Morris try was fine IMO

 

[OXY-351]

I actually like Gus's philosophy on this. If it looks like a try it probably is. If you need to look at it 7, 8, 9 times after initially thinking try, then it should just be given.

Conversely if on first impression it didn't look like a try, and after 7, 8, 9 views you can't clearly say it is, disallow it.

If you need to look at something 9 times, it should be given as a benfit of the doubt try.

 

[Browny]

Or how about benefit of the doubt to the defending team

 

[Kaz]

Or how about benefit of the doubt to the defending team

Only if they are still trying to defend, instead of throwing thier hands in the air, waiting for a penalty.

This is Farah during most games. ¯\(º_º)/¯

 

[anzac7]

Nah, Freddy had a meeting with Bill Harrigan 2 years ago so he's an expert on obstruction and that wasn't a try...

lol..

and what does moot stand for?

 

[Coxy]

lol..

and what does moot stand for?

Irrelevant.

 

[jarro65]

I know it's already been mentioned somewhere here, but i've just watched a replay of the game, and i can't believe how awesome Nate Myles was !!

Truly fantastic performance .... he really made the going tough for NSW in the middle third.

 

[anzac7]

Irrelevant.

Oh yes, of course. I was reading it as an acronym.. that's why I couldn't quite figure it out.

Cheers

 

[Browny]

I know it's already been mentioned somewhere here, but i've just watched a replay of the game, and i can't believe how awesome Nate Myles was !!

Truly fantastic performance .... he really made the going tough for NSW in the middle third.

He was knackered on his last couple of runs