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

Harrigan - please explain

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by silvertail, May 21, 2012.

  1. silvertail

    silvertail Well-Known Member Premium Member

    791
    316
    Ratings:
    +423 /9
    NRL referees' boss Bill Harrigan admitted on Monday a video refereeing blunder cost the Sydney Roosters a legitimate try in their 18-10 loss to Manly, but the tryscorer himself believes it didn't decide the game.

    With Manly leading 16-10 at Brookvale Oval on Sunday, Roosters halfback Daniel Mortimer crossed under the posts for a potentially match-levelling try but was cruelly denied by video referee Pat Reynolds moments later.

    Reynolds ruled that Roosters second-rower Brad Takairangi, who was placed on report, had used his elbow in a dangerous manner against Manly's Daniel Harrison when attempting the offload which led to Mortimer's try.

    But Harrigan admits the video referee erred in hitting the red button and that the Roosters should have been awarded the crucial try.

    "The video referee got this call wrong," Harrigan said on NRL.com

    "It should have been ruled a try to the Roosters.

    "The video referee believed that there was a raised elbow from the ball carrier in the lead-up to Daniel Mortimer crossing the line, but he got the decision wrong."

     
     
  2. Canteen Worker

    Canteen Worker Well-Known Member

    Ratings:
    +214 /5
    So forwards are now allowed to lead with the elbow and take opposing players out??
     
  3. dceagle

    dceagle Active Member

    459
    50
    Ratings:
    +50 /0
    Harrigan has been a Rooster Booster for many years now
     
  4. silvertail

    silvertail Well-Known Member Premium Member

    791
    316
    Ratings:
    +423 /9
    Cannot believe that Harrigan came out with these statements.
     
  5. SP_Eagle

    SP_Eagle Member

    79
    12
    Ratings:
    +12 /0
    Gotta love how he gives no explanation as to why.... What Bob Fulton said about this goose is right !
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • silvertail

      silvertail Well-Known Member Premium Member

      791
      316
      Ratings:
      +423 /9
      The club should seek an explanation from him.
       
    • KOMORI

      KOMORI Born and bred an Eagle

      3,895
      1,112
      Ratings:
      +3,663 /62
      What_game_did_Hollywood_watch????

      Goose.
       
      • Like Like x 1
      • bones

        bones Bones Knows

        8,370
        5,100
        Ratings:
        +9,036 /102
        I thought it was a try as well.
         
      • manlywarringah

        manlywarringah Well-Known Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

        889
        327
        Ratings:
        +1,077 /31
        You can't put your elbow into someone's jaw and get away with it.

        If that was done on the 50 metre line, it would've been a penalty and the guy put on report.
         
        • Like Like x 1
        • bones

          bones Bones Knows

          8,370
          5,100
          Ratings:
          +9,036 /102
          It happens plenty of times every match and nothing is done.
           
        • Garts

          Garts Well-Known Member

          Ratings:
          +802 /23
          Braith was right and so is Harrigan, should have been a try. If the shoe was on the other foot you would be screaming blue murder.
           
          • Like Like x 1
          • dowdz

            dowdz Well-Known Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

            Ratings:
            +980 /9
            Should have never gotten to a video ref if the officials picked up the forward pass in the build up. Square up I reckon. Also, anyone hear the ref call held on the Roosters line, when they dropped the ball and one of our players dived over the line?
             
            • Like Like x 1
            • Jono

              Jono Well-Known Member

              Ratings:
              +176 /5
              However, what about the blatant knock on after the short kickoff? The Roosters knocked that ball on and it was overlooked. In addition, players were off side all game on both sides. The refereeing was horrible all game.[hr]
              However, what about the blatant knock on after the short kickoff? The Roosters knocked that ball on and it was overlooked. In addition, players were off side all game on both sides. The refereeing was horrible all game.[hr]
              However, what about the blatant knock on after the short kickoff? The Roosters knocked that ball on and it was overlooked. In addition, players were off side all game on both sides. The refereeing was horrible all game.
               
            • globaleagle

              globaleagle Deux bourbons s'il vous plait Staff Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

              13,889
              5,574
              Ratings:
              +11,235 /94
              jono, what are you trying to say to say to say?
               
              • Like Like x 1
              • Ian Martin tragic

                Ian Martin tragic Well-Known Member

                Ratings:
                +169 /0
                jono: I say everything thrice.

                I think the roosters were dudded on that one, even if it was technically correct. If the refs had spotted it they should have blown the whistle and stopped the play right there.

                But what about the decision to have the roosters play the ball after their player was being railroaded over their tryline and he loses it!

                And when they restarted play incorrectly and were told to go back and do it again.

                It was like a childcare centre out there. Mean while the players were trying to tear each other to shreds.

                Maybe the refs had better change from that pink colour; seems to be getting to them a bit.
                 
              • eagles2win

                eagles2win Well-Known Member

                Ratings:
                +494 /0
                It should have been a try.

                Here's another Friend kept tapping the ball a) off the mark or b) when he hadnt been given a mark - under the rules that constitutes a scrum.
                All the comentators on fox picked it up
                 
              • Ralphie

                Ralphie Well-Known Member Premium Member

                Ratings:
                +2,565 /271
                If the shoe was on the other foot and let's say it was Matai with the raised arm the result would have been no try and a 3 week suspension.
                 
              • lismore_fan

                lismore_fan Well-Known Member

                Ratings:
                +216 /1
                Anasta cries to the ref, "I've been playing a long time and this happens... welll... pause..pause... a million times!"
                 
              • Stevo

                Stevo Well-Known Member

                4,617
                1,002
                Ratings:
                +1,396 /56
                I fail to see how the video ref got it wrong. The on field referee asked him to check for a raised elbow. He saw a raised elbow. I know this cause i saw a raised elbow. Is Harrigan arguing that there was no raised elbow or that it shouldn't have been refered?
                 
              • bones

                bones Bones Knows

                8,370
                5,100
                Ratings:
                +9,036 /102
                They should have awarded the try and just let the match review committee decide whether or not to take it further.
                 
                • Like Like x 1

                Share This Page