Am I blind or just too biased to see it?
We have this deluge of media comments making spurious comments about a supposed knock on that led to Koula's try. Lets not talk about Manly's performance in defeating last year's premiers. Lets talk about an alleged knock on leading to a try. And regrettably because they have declared that belief, it has become the truth somehow and no doubt will be the big talking point.
Now I've watched the replay of this incident several times. The ball is passed by a Penrith player, hits a Manly player's arm when he tried to grab it, and falls behind him, not in front of him. He's standing still so that's not an issue. It bounces and continues in a backward motion, leading to Koula picking up the ball behind the other Manly player and racing down field. The ref gave it the OK. The bunker gave it the OK. But the media declared it a blatant knock on. Even Penrith seemed convinced it was a knock on.
Now what is a knock on? According to the definition;
Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and 'it goes forward', or when a player 'hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward', and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it.
Now, am I being biased? The ball fell out backwards and then bounced backwards. The Manly player was stationary. How on Earth can that be declared a knock on? Fair dinkum some of these media bogons seem not to understand the basic fundamentals of the game. Above is a quite simple definition of what a knock on is. Do they not know that? Where the hell do they come up with 'knock on' and then make that the major talking factor of the game. Someone needs to kick a few of them in the head to get their brains in synch with reality.