1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Can someone explain to me . . .

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by EagleFromMay1967, May 7, 2013.

  1. EagleFromMay1967

    EagleFromMay1967 In bed before the room got dark.

    2,645
    687
    Blue Mountains these days
    Ratings:
    +1,212 / 44
    Can someone explain to me WHAT WAS WRONG with Jorge's first try . Ruled No Try by the Video Idiot box people. ?

    Looked fair n square to me no St Merge player anywhere within cooey
     
  2. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Well-Known Member

    2,676
    310
    Ratings:
    +310 / 0
    I believe that it was called back because Tom Symonds clipped the Stanley (I think it was him anyway) as he ran his line.

    Not that Stanley had any chance of actually getting to Tafua, but they have been calling that as an obstruction. That one's more a case of the rule being wrong rather than the refs, I think.
     
  3. DSM5

    DSM5 Well-Known Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    9,997
    516
    Ratings:
    +516 / 0
    Horsehead.
     
  4. Chip and Chase

    Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    12,810
    3,170
    Ratings:
    +6,282 / 44
    I didn't have a problem with it. Symonds ran a decoy and bumped a Merge player who was within tackling range. You just can't do that anymore so no point arguing about it. I'd be dirty if they ruled a try against us in that circumstance.
     
  5. Disco

    Disco Well-Known Member

    1,906
    440
    Ratings:
    +1,233 / 37
    They called obstruction, Symonds grazed Stanley
     
  6. Hamster Huey

    Hamster Huey Space Invader Premium Member

    1,828
    643
    Ratings:
    +990 / 7
    And yet the Slater try on the weekend got awarded.

    Seems the ref interpretations are wildly flipping between 'black and white' and 'massive grey area'. I at least liked the early season interpretation which put ALL the obligation on the attack to stay out of the defensive line.

    Now we've just gone back to the lottery.
     
  7. Fluffy

    Fluffy Well-Known Member

    17,768
    1,417
    Ratings:
    +3,624 / 132
    Agree Huey, it seems we now have a hit and miss and 2 very similar infringements in the same game as we had with the souffs game can go opposite ways.

    The fans, players, coaches, sponsors all want consistency.

    As for last nights call I believe it to be correct, Stanley was delayed on forcing the Stewart pass, had he been there a second earlier as would have been the case with no obstruction then the pass to Tafua happens further out and the goons have much more chance to get to him.

    Last week on the other hand was a crap call.
     
  8. susan

    susan Well-Known Member

    2,418
    1,040
    Ratings:
    +2,043 / 30
    We had a chance to reduce massively those repetitive boring decoy plays for good by holding strong and keeping the rule Anderson brought in.It did 2 things-it gave certainty and more importantly would have forced the knucklehead follow the leader coaches to come up with something different.But,as usual,the coaches got their way and now we have this controversy every week.Not often Freddy is dead right but his vocal defence of the original rule was spot on.

    As usual the NRL will now reap what it sows.
     
  9. manlyfan76

    manlyfan76 Parra Trolls are the best. Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    8,553
    2,429
    Anywhere but Parramatta
    Ratings:
    +5,341 / 111
    I actually found myself agreeing with Fittler. I thought we only agreed on drinking copious amounts of beer but when he says that the decoy runner while contacting the A defender also keeps the B defender in closer as he can't leave a gap on his inside but an advantage is created on B's outside.
     
  10. SeaEagleRock8

    SeaEagleRock8 Sea Eagle Lach Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    12,593
    3,522
    Ratings:
    +6,793 / 122
    A rule that mystifies fans is bad for the game.
     
  11. Jatz Crackers

    Jatz Crackers Moderator Staff Member

    9,128
    1,149
    Ratings:
    +1,242 / 7
    One day a defender will fall over from the air pressure wave brought on by the fast approaching decoy attacker. The decoy will not touch the defender. It will be a no try and penalty to the defending team.
     
  12. EagleFromMay1967

    EagleFromMay1967 In bed before the room got dark.

    2,645
    687
    Blue Mountains these days
    Ratings:
    +1,212 / 44
    Ok, so Tom Symonds grazed someone, and Taufua 's try was disallowed.

    So, can someone please explain to me why Barba's try on the weekend Vs Warriors was ruled a fair try ? The attacking player does more than just 'graze' - he blatantly impedes, obstructs the relevant defending player.

    In all my years, i've never seen anything in League as ridiculous as the current "Obstruction" rule, and its adjudication / application by the current Video referees.

    I can only compare to French touch judges. (on French soil in days of yore). The ARL needs to take a good hard look at itself on this one.
     
  13. SeaEagleRock8

    SeaEagleRock8 Sea Eagle Lach Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    12,593
    3,522
    Ratings:
    +6,793 / 122
    I agree, maybe there is some sense to the current rule but I have given up trying to work it out. When they go to the video I consider it a toss-up. Unless it's one of ours, in which case I asume the decision is against us.
     
  14. Jatz Crackers

    Jatz Crackers Moderator Staff Member

    9,128
    1,149
    Ratings:
    +1,242 / 7
    I havnt had this much explaining to do since I was married.
     
  15. SeaEagleRock8

    SeaEagleRock8 Sea Eagle Lach Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    12,593
    3,522
    Ratings:
    +6,793 / 122
    Jatz did you get in trouble for making a forward pass?
     
  16. Jatz Crackers

    Jatz Crackers Moderator Staff Member

    9,128
    1,149
    Ratings:
    +1,242 / 7
    LOL.....well it sure wasnt a back ended deal :)
     
  17. eagle-rock08

    eagle-rock08 Active Member

    565
    70
    Ratings:
    +70 / 0
    What we need is to live-feed the game footage to a central location where three or four video refs watch every game and rule on each event each week.

    The video referees do not need to actually be at the games. They can simply use the live feed.

    That way each weekend's games will all be judged by the same people. Next week it could be a different set of referees. But at least we would get some consistency.
     
  18. EagleFromMay1967

    EagleFromMay1967 In bed before the room got dark.

    2,645
    687
    Blue Mountains these days
    Ratings:
    +1,212 / 44
    For extra laughs, they could be French, like, in France.
     
  19. globaleagle

    globaleagle Où est mon chapeau Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    11,776
    4,704
    Ratings:
    +7,778 / 58
    Over here in ice hockey, if there is a referee's review, it all goes back to central hub in toronto. Although mistakes can still be made, it's more consistent.


    Actually, in vancouver, the skytrain system has no drivers and is run from toronto.

    One day toronto had a power outage and it stopped the trains in vancouver! (Tis like a sydney and perth comparison for those geographically challenged)




    *today is no caps for place names day - apparently.
     
  20. DSM5

    DSM5 Well-Known Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    9,997
    516
    Ratings:
    +516 / 0
    Toronto would have to be the ugliest city on earth.
     

Share This Page