Perenara isn't up to it

[SeaEagleRock8]

I think you are misinterpreting the rule Holden. That rule doesn't mean a ref can't rule 'held up in goal' if that's what they thought it was.

 

[Stevo]

That's not clear at all. He didn't disallow the try. He sent it upstairs to the video referee with his opinion that it was a no try. The video referee is the one that stuffed up not Perenara.

The rule is stupid because if the referee hasn't seen what happened why does he have to give his opinion of what happened to the video referee when he sends it up to him for adjudication?

I actually thought H was the better ref. It seemed to me that Hayne was the one that was crucifying us.

 

[mickqld]

It was totally the video refs fault. He has the power to over rule a no try. Matai's arm was clearly on the line on the ground with the ball. It was a try and nothing but blatant cheating could deny it.

 

[HoldenV8]

Even if Perenara thought Matai might have been held up in goal, the fact is that because he was unsighted he should have called it a try before sending it upstairs for review, even if he still told the video refs what his opinion of it was. His call of no-try when he was unsighted was incorrect under the laws of the game because a no-try call is disallowing it. That's my opinion anyway.

@Stevo....other than the Matai no-try, I agree that Perenara was the less biased of the two refs out there on Friday night. Hayne (a rumored long time Souths fan) hammered us every chance he got, especially late in the tackle count when the Bunnies were struggling to get out of their own 30.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

http://www.playrugbyleague.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/International-Laws-of-the-Game.pdf

Scoring - Section 6, page 12. Its there in black and white.

Referee unsighted - The referee should not disallow a try because he was not in a position to see the grounding of the ball

But the rule does not say he has to award it!

The double negative is very clumsy drafting, and makes the rule harder to understand. But clearly a ref can say held up if that's what he thought.
(However I agree this decision was a total dud.)

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

http://www.playrugbyleague.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/International-Laws-of-the-Game.pdf

Scoring - Section 6, page 12. Its there in black and white.

Referee unsighted - The referee should not disallow a try because he was not in a position to see the grounding of the ball

But the rule does not say he has to award it!

The double negative is very clumsy drafting, and makes the rule harder to understand. But clearly a ref can say held up if that's what he thought.
(However I agree this decision was a total dud.)

Actually...
it's a triple negative - no wonder it's confusing :huh:


Referee unsighted - The referee should
not ...
disallow a try
because he was not in a position to see the grounding of the ball

 

[globaleagle]

Toovey, however, will be disappointed if he phones the referees boss Daniel Anderson for clarification of the Steve Matai no-try decision on Friday, which was one of the triggers for his spray.

Anderson said he was comfortable with the decision by the officials on the night.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Anderson said he was comfortable with the decision by the officials on the night.

Such meaningless dribble that sentence is. He has the wording of the previous NRL boss down pat.

 

[bob dylan]

The pocket referee should not be awarding penalties at all.

Can't experienced refs like Hayne do more than 1 game per round.

What's the difference between refereeing Friday and Monday in the same round compared to doing a Monday game followed by a Friday???