Can someone remind me why we have the Bunker?

[The Who]

Everybody watching the match, at the ground and on TV, was happy that Bully scored a fair try. Why then do we have some nuffy in a Bunker miles from the ground making such a ludicrous decision in slow-mo?
Then Woods scores. The ref is satisfied but the nuffy rules that you can force the ball because it brushes the back of your hand when you are trying to pick the ball up with no intention of forcing it.
These decisions could have cost Manly the match. It will cost a team a premiership one grand final.
There is so much wrong with the Bunker, but the main irritation is that it is taking away a lot of enjoyment from the sport.

 

[Uk eagle]

They get plenty wrong but I'm happy that Hughes grounded the ball (intentionally or not)

 

[HK_Eagle]

1. Deep state levels of political manipulation?
2. To give the interns something to do?
3. Harvard experiment in how much you can screw over human beings and get away with it?
4. Somewhere for V’Landy and Abdo to take their Friday night drunken pick ups?

 

[JenEagle]

Yeah that bully no try was tough call.
Woods pulled at the ball however Hughes actually still had control then through it backwards. They should have awarded that.

 

[The Who]

They get plenty wrong but I'm happy that Hughes grounded the ball (intentionally or not)

Let's see how consistent the grounding rules are in future matches. This ruling means that any unintentional contact by a hand -- palm or back of the hand -- on a ball on the ground in the in-goal area is either grounded or is a try.
We should see some unintentional tries scored.

 

[Top End Eagle]

I'll go you one better, and I'm pleased Bobinson picked it up in the press conference. Not that I wanted the roosters to win but Collins scored on the line yesterday the bunker has two quick looks at it and says no evidence to overturn it when normally they check whether the player tied double knots properly in his boots on the way out of the dressing room, all because the ducking pass from Keary in the lead up was two metres forward and would have caused the refs no end of controversy in the media if it was awarded in the following week

 

[ricardo]

Gee can tell his handlers he won't be handing any of the money back ... he did everything he could for Melbourne last night.

The bunker funked up terribly last night ... that downward pressure one was a joke and Woods' "strip" was a farce

 

[The '47ers]

The Turbo HIA call too, I know the Docs call it, but they saw it but no bunker intervention?

 

[grassy]

That def was a try. Melbourne had no control over that ball at all. It’s amazing what things look like when you take a photo or slow things down. The only thing a bunker is good for is suicide. Bully scored that fair and square. Mel f D up.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Sadly what we are seeing by this slo mo, frame by frame vision is not more try’s but less try’s.

And I thought it was supposed to be about entertainment.

In years gone by both those decisions would be try’s.

Now a try is scored, and the bunker clowns then works the next 5 minutes trying everything on their power to take them away.

I get the “ checking if a winger is out before he puts the ball down “ and the current chestnut “ is that obstruction “ but fair dinkum this frame by frame vision to avoid awarding a try is painful to say the least.

 

[Eagle 1]

Everybody watching the match, at the ground and on TV, was happy that Bully scored a fair try. Why then do we have some nuffy in a Bunker miles from the ground making such a ludicrous decision in slow-mo?
Then Woods scores. The ref is satisfied but the nuffy rules that you can force the ball because it brushes the back of your hand when you are trying to pick the ball up with no intention of forcing it.
These decisions could have cost Manly the match. It will cost a team a premiership one grand final.
There is so much wrong with the Bunker, but the main irritation is that it is taking away a lot of enjoyment from the sport.

Also to much impetus on the slow motion repays instead of normal speed. In normal speed Woods has his hand on the ball but appears to be letting go in a brushing motion rather than a stripping motion, big difference.

 

[cc eagle]

Sadly what we are seeing by this slo mo, frame by frame vision is not more try’s but less try’s.

And I thought it was supposed to be about entertainment.

In years gone by both those decisions would be try’s.

Now a try is scored, and the bunker clowns then works the next 5 minutes trying everything on their power to take them away.

I get the “ checking if a winger is out before he puts the ball down “ and the current chestnut “ is that obstruction “ but fair dinkum this frame by frame vision to avoid awarding a try is painful to say the least.

But they also award trys the same way, frame by frame to see a finger tip ground the ball, when most watching are saying he lost it.

 

[cc eagle]

Also to much impetus on the slow motion repays instead of normal speed. In normal speed Woods has his hand on the ball but appears to be letting go in a brushing motion rather than a stripping motion, big difference.

The ball often pops out during a tackle and the bunker rules, he's in the motion of make a tackle and no stripping action

 

[court83]

The bully not try was a joke.. that was nitpicking to try take it away..

I’m happy with the woods no try.: Hughes fumbled that ball but intentionally put pressure on it when he knew he couldn’t pick it up… if it was tommy doing the exact same thing we would all be gushing over his awareness to do it… aslong as there’s any form of downward pressure I’m happy to call that grounded

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

But they also award trys the same way, frame by frame to see a finger tip ground the ball, when most watching are saying he lost it.

Agree , but there’s a lot more denied , than awarded.

Just let the ref decide , he’ll **** a few up but as long as every try isn’t shown at 1/1000th speed then we won’t have an issue.

 

[cc eagle]

I'll go you one better, and I'm pleased Bobinson picked it up in the press conference. Not that I wanted the roosters to win but Collins scored on the line yesterday the bunker has two quick looks at it and says no evidence to overturn it when normally they check whether the player tied double knots properly in his boots on the way out of the dressing room, all because the ducking pass from Keary in the lead up was two metres forward and would have caused the refs no end of controversy in the media if it was awarded in the following week

Apparently the TV replays we see aren't always the ones the bunker sees.

 

[cc eagle]

Agree , but there’s a lot more denied , than awarded.

Just let the ref decide , he’ll **** a few up but as long as every try isn’t shown at 1/1000th speed then we won’t have an issue.

And then we''ll all blow up when we see the replays of the refs f**k up and it cost a team an important game

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

And then we''ll all blow up when we see the replays of the refs f**k up and it cost a team an important game

Can’t win can you, damned if you do , damned if you don’t

 

[JenEagle]

Also to much impetus on the slow motion repays instead of normal speed. In normal speed Woods has his hand on the ball but appears to be letting go in a brushing motion rather than a stripping motion, big difference.

Absolutely. That was an insane decision to not award that try to bully.

 

[mickqld]

Just saw why there is a bunker in the Warriors v Cows. Try decision overturned by a foot on the sideline that no one could possibly have seen in real time.