Kangaroos vs. Kiwis

[Coxy]

It wasn't a knock on yet because it was still in the air. Nightingale was well within his rights to tackle him. It's not a knock on UNTIL THE BALL HITS SOMETHING AFTER GOING FORWARD. Until that happens, the last person to touch the ball is deemed to be in possession of the ball and as such can be tackled. Again, been like this for 20+ years.

just to reiterate - if you intentionally play at the ball and hit it up in the air, you are fair game to be tackled even though you don't have the ball in your hands. If you intentionally hit it forward its a penalty, if you intentionally play at it but didn't mean for it to go forward, like hodges did, its play on and you can be tackled since you're in possession until it hits something else.

Again, show me the rule in the rulebook. Not the one you made up. By your reckoning you can tackle someone after they've passed it but before someone else has caught it. Dumbarse.

 

[Dexter]

At the time I thought we were lucky to not have a try awarded, I still do, I've seen thousands of those types of juggling the ball and get tackled at the same time incidents and it is usually awarded a try. Yep, Nightingale went on with the tackle but I thought he was entitled to.


On another note, I haven't had much of an opinion one way or the other about the whole Tamou selection issue but seeing him trying to sing the anthem last night convinced me we cheapened our Aussie jersey so NSW could have Tamou, it looked so wrong.

Thanks Ricky.

 

[Browny]

The bloke I work with who is a ref had no issue with it being a penalty. I swear you just like to stir shit and make nonsensical arguments.

 

[Kaz]

Here are the 2013 rules etc

http://www.nrl.com/portals/nrl/RadEditor/Documents/NRL Rules book 2013FINAL.pdf

Obstruction 5. A player who is not holding the ball shall not be tackled or obstructed. (See Section 15).

It's on page 11

I didn't go to section 15, you can find it & read it.

 

[Coxy]

Asked a referee friend of mine:

Hodges was entitled to clean it up, but there was enough from Nightingale to stop him.

So GFY.

 

[Anonymous person]

Again, show me the rule in the rulebook. Not the one you made up. By your reckoning you can tackle someone after they've passed it but before someone else has caught it. Dumbarse.

No, after you've passed it or kicked it you're not in possession. Juggling the ball counts as in possession, and that's what hodges was doing.

Thanks for the name calling too, appreciate it.

 

[Anonymous person]

Here are the 2013 rules etc

http://www.nrl.com/portals/nrl/RadEditor/Documents/NRL Rules book 2013FINAL.pdf

Obstruction 5. A player who is not holding the ball shall not be tackled or obstructed. (See Section 15).

It's on page 11

I didn't go to section 15, you can find it & read it.

lol it says refer to section 15, which states

"A player is guilty of misconduct if he deliberately obstructs an opponent who is not in possession."

juggling the ball = possession.

So GFY.

Gfy?

also, what exactly does your mates quote mean? "Enough from nightingale to stop him"? Hodges was entitled to clean it up?

 

[Coxy]

No, after you've passed it or kicked it you're not in possession. Juggling the ball counts as in possession, and that's what hodges was doing.

Thanks for the name calling too, appreciate it.

Because you are a dumbarse. Nightingale had plenty of time to realise Hodges didn't have the ball, and should've released him. Instead he drags him away from the ball, preventing Hodges the opportunity to clean it up. Penalty. Every day of the week. Has been for 105 years.

But of course, you know better.

 

[Big Pete]

This isn't going anywhere.

Everyone has made their points clear. Until there is a new development, just agree to disagree.

 

[Mr Fourex]

Was it just me, or was the Gallen pass to Slater that lead to the Boyd try, miles forward?

Looked it to me as well.......

 

[Dexter]

Originally Posted by Anonymous person
No, after you've passed it or kicked it you're not in possession. Juggling the ball counts as in possession, and that's what hodges was doing.

Thanks for the name calling too, appreciate it.

Because you are a dumbarse. Nightingale had plenty of time to realise Hodges didn't have the ball, and should've released him. Instead he drags him away from the ball, preventing Hodges the opportunity to clean it up. Penalty. Every day of the week. Has been for 105 years.

But of course, you know better.

I can see validity in both arguments and personally I think we were lucky but as far as the rules are concerned there is no definition of what possession is to cover that situation.

The ref called no try based on what he saw and even though I thought we got lucky there wasn't conclusive evidence to overturn his decision. It was just one of those things in a game that happen quickly and can look different in slow mo than normal speed.

I do think that it should have been a scrum to restart play, that part was strange.

 

[Mister Wright]

I thought Hodges had a very strong game. If he didn't outperform Inglis he was at least his equal. He certainly is in good form at the moment.

 

[Ghibli]

Hodges is starting to move very nicely across the field again, wonder when he'll get injured?

 

[Kimlo]

Hodges is starting to move very nicely across the field again, wonder when he'll get injured?

Argghhh, I hate posts like this. How about we just enjoy Hodges playing? It seems everytime Hodges is playing well someone has to say "wonder how long he'll last".

 

[Broncoman]

I thought Hodges had a good game by any standards but didn't use his winger Morris as much.

 

[OXY-351]

Nightingale had plenty of time to realise Hodges didn't have the ball, and should've released him. Instead he drags him away from the ball, preventing Hodges the opportunity to clean it up. Penalty. Every day of the week. Has been for 105 years.

To the letter of the law, I don't think it shoudl have been a try, but how many times do you see similar things happen in other games where team A will lose the ball after juggling the ball and getting tackled, and either play is ruled to go on if team B picks it up, or a scrum is packed with a feed to team B if team A regains it. I think this would have been ruled the same, but wasn't because it lead to a try.

As I said, I don't think it should have been a try, but I swear the rules get enforced a lot more pedantically when something directly leads to a try than when it doesn't.