Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Burns no try

PJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
2,801
Reaction score
49
Can somebody please tell me why this wasn't a try. I was of the understanding the referees were going to introduce some commonsense to this rule and judging by the weekend decisions I thought they had...that was until last night.
Obviously the game was already won more or less but just the same no one I was watching it with could see anything wrong with it???
 

Nutzcraw

Active Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
4,826
Reaction score
4
It's because G. Stewart was "loitering" in the defensive line... if he had of gone through or ran back to our side it would have been fine.

I think it was a try for the simple fact that Hannant had every oppurtunity to tackle burns without coming in contact with Stewart... he chose to run into Stewart therefore it should have been his fault and a Manly try.

Oh well, lucky it didn't cost us the game.
 

PJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
2,801
Reaction score
49
it's a joke it will get to the point where players won't bother trying those moves becasue they will keep getting pulled up for b/s reasons like was the case last night.
 

Dan

Kim Jong Dan
Staff member
Administrator
2018 Tipping Competitor
2019 Tipping Competitor
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
35,685
Reaction score
11,487
Whether he was going to make the tackle or not wasnt the point it was that he was denied the opportunity. However I think common sense needs to come into it
 

clontaago

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
6,420
Reaction score
166
He was only denied the opportunity through his own fault. As Daley said, he had ample opportunity to go left or right, but chose to run into Stewart.

It should have been a try.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Hannant is a fat slug and wouldn't have got to Burns anywway.

They have created a huge problem with this now as any player in defence will simply try to run into one of the decoy runners now and get the try dissallowed.
 

Crushercleal

Active Member
Joined
May 27, 2005
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
4
You can't have players loitering in THEIR line. I think that's fair enough. Stewart (or whoever it was) made no attempt to get back into our line. The onus should be on Stewart, not Hannant.
 

byso

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
9,622
Reaction score
128
I agree with Crusher. To be honest I'd blame Burns he should know the rules by now. Could've run toward the posts away from Glen if he was a quick thinker.
 

Dan

Kim Jong Dan
Staff member
Administrator
2018 Tipping Competitor
2019 Tipping Competitor
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
35,685
Reaction score
11,487
I agree with Crusher. To be honest I'd blame Burns he should know the rules by now. Could've run toward the posts away from Glen if he was a quick thinker.


or he could have run the gap.

**** byso, you would have done well to pick up the ball witht he pace of your thinking.

Glenn's fault not Burns
 

fLIP

UFO Hunter
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Messages
7,469
Reaction score
2,876
Yeah, while I understand what the referees were getting at, it creates almost a catch 22 situation.

Considering in Rugby League that you MUST pass backwards, there is always going to be a player who is closer to the line than the ball runner in a situation like last nights.

Now, Glen Stewart didn't pass the ball and was a decoy runner, however, he also didn't complete his run by moving into the defensive line. He stopped his run meters short of interfering with anyone and after stopping the defense line that was pushing up caused him to be in the middle of it.

Considering he did not move to obstruct anyone, Burns didn't run behind him and the Broncos player made the choice to run into Stewart instead of either side it should have been awarded a try.
 

DSM5

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
9,989
Reaction score
524
Yep, we would have an 8 point gap rather than a 2. ( which in this competition might be crucial at the end)
 

mellonhead

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2004
Messages
408
Reaction score
0
You should have listened in on the conversation between Des and David Gallop after the game, did know so many words started with F. Des basically told him he had wasted his time going the the meeting to change the intereptation.
 

Latest posts

2020 Ladder

Team P W D L PD Pts
1 Panthers 20 18 1 1 299 37
2 Storm 20 16 0 4 258 32
3 Eels 20 15 0 5 104 30
4 Roosters 20 14 0 6 230 28
5 Raiders 20 14 0 6 128 28
6 Rabbitohs 20 12 0 8 169 24
7 Knights 20 11 1 8 47 23
8 Sharks 20 10 0 10 0 20
9 Titans 20 9 0 11 -117 18
10 Warriors 20 8 0 12 -115 16
11 Tigers 20 7 0 13 -65 14
12 Dragons 20 7 0 13 -74 14
13 Sea Eagles 20 7 0 13 -134 14
14 Cowboys 20 5 0 15 -152 10
15 Bulldogs 20 3 0 17 -222 6
16 Broncos 20 3 0 17 -356 6
Top Bottom