i was at the game (sitting in front of the family hill so no decent view of the big screen)& couldn't figure out why the manly try in the second half was dis-allowed. also what was the ensuing penalty for?
mmmdl said:What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?
mmmdl said:What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?
Stevo said:mmmdl said:What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?
Because a penalty over rules an error. :rules:
Shoe1 said:mmmdl said:What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?
True why not?
Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
7 | 6 | 1 | 54 | 14 | |
6 | 5 | 1 | 59 | 12 | |
6 | 4 | 2 | 53 | 10 | |
6 | 4 | 2 | 30 | 10 | |
7 | 4 | 2 | 25 | 9 | |
8 | 4 | 4 | 73 | 8 | |
7 | 4 | 3 | 40 | 8 | |
7 | 4 | 3 | 24 | 8 | |
7 | 3 | 4 | 17 | 8 | |
7 | 4 | 3 | -8 | 8 | |
8 | 4 | 4 | -60 | 8 | |
8 | 3 | 4 | 17 | 7 | |
6 | 2 | 4 | -31 | 6 | |
7 | 3 | 4 | -41 | 6 | |
7 | 2 | 5 | -29 | 4 | |
7 | 1 | 6 | -87 | 4 | |
7 | 1 | 6 | -136 | 4 |