Harrigan's "Official View" re Wolfmans possible penalty try

[mmmdl]

Did the referee make the right call when David Williams was hit high – could this have been a penalty try?

This could potentially have been awarded a penalty try. The referee thought that David Williams had made a double-movement so he penalised the first infringement, which was a high tackle against the Warriors.

Umm, if this is the case why did the referee then try and refer it to the video ref? Shortall clearly stuffed up by blowing the penalty without referring it upstairs.

Oh, and to Warren Smith you moron - Manly didn't get lucky on that call. The high shot occurred BEFORE the alleged double movement, meaning referral or not, it would have always been a penalty at the very least to Manly.

 

[mmmdl]

Did the referee make the right call when David Williams was hit high – could this have been a penalty try?

This could potentially have been awarded a penalty try. The referee thought that David Williams had made a double-movement so he penalised the first infringement, which was a high tackle against the Warriors.

Umm, if this is the case why did the referee then try and refer it to the video ref? Shortall clearly stuffed up by blowing the penalty without referring it upstairs.

Oh, and to Warren Smith you moron - Manly didn't get lucky on that call. The high shot occurred BEFORE the alleged double movement, meaning referral or not, it would have always been a penalty at the very least to Manly.

 

[Dan]

He blew the penalty before Wolfman had finished moving!

 

[Dan]

He blew the penalty before Wolfman had finished moving!

 

[Napper]

What a load of ****. I cant believe this clown. He's gotta go.

 

[Napper]

What a load of ****. I cant believe this clown. He's gotta go.

 

[Rex]

So now Harrigan is claiming the ref saw a double movement before blowing the whistle?

Absolutely wonderful he has recruited referees who see into the future.

 

[Rex]

So now Harrigan is claiming the ref saw a double movement before blowing the whistle?

Absolutely wonderful he has recruited referees who see into the future.

 

[Chip and Chase]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. More of the same rubbish from Hollywood. He is the Iraqi Information Minister of the NRL. I was hoping there would be some accountability from the refs this year, instead we have seen even more creative ways of justifying stupid decisions.

 

[Chip and Chase]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. More of the same rubbish from Hollywood. He is the Iraqi Information Minister of the NRL. I was hoping there would be some accountability from the refs this year, instead we have seen even more creative ways of justifying stupid decisions.

 

[The Who]

Simply too much ego from Harrigan to be the boss of referees who are supposed to be seen and not heard.

 

[The Who]

Simply too much ego from Harrigan to be the boss of referees who are supposed to be seen and not heard.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

I have been a big Harrigan supporter in years gone by. Ive adjusted my position this year. On current form he needs to go.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

I have been a big Harrigan supporter in years gone by. Ive adjusted my position this year. On current form he needs to go.

 

[tookey]

Harigan is a long time rabid parra supporter who hates manly with a passion. Biased opinions every time against Manly

 

[tookey]

Harigan is a long time rabid parra supporter who hates manly with a passion. Biased opinions every time against Manly

 

[DSM5]

It's interesting that when the illegal act was committed on a player attempting to place the ball on the try line, no try, penalty try or sin bin was considered. So now, does he mean that when a player takes another out as they are putting the ball down for a try, no try, just a penalty? Doesn't make any sense.

 

[DSM5]

It's interesting that when the illegal act was committed on a player attempting to place the ball on the try line, no try, penalty try or sin bin was considered. So now, does he mean that when a player takes another out as they are putting the ball down for a try, no try, just a penalty? Doesn't make any sense.

 

[Dan]

It's interesting that when the illegal act was committed on a player attempting to place the ball on the try line, no try, penalty try or sin bin was considered. So now, does he mean that when a player takes another out as they are putting the ball down for a try, no try, just a penalty? Doesn't make any sense.

What he is saying is that A Penalty try could have been awarded in this situation, however the referee deemed that the infringement was two fold and almost simultaneous.

He is saying the ref got this wrong but is covering things up a little

 

[Dan]

It's interesting that when the illegal act was committed on a player attempting to place the ball on the try line, no try, penalty try or sin bin was considered. So now, does he mean that when a player takes another out as they are putting the ball down for a try, no try, just a penalty? Doesn't make any sense.

What he is saying is that A Penalty try could have been awarded in this situation, however the referee deemed that the infringement was two fold and almost simultaneous.

He is saying the ref got this wrong but is covering things up a little