Questions for Bill Harrigan

[Rex]

Des hasn't publicly ranted about the refereeing, but that doesn't stop him from seeking a considered response from Harrigan. Questions include:

1. Does Harrigan agree:
a) The video ref's brief is to provide BOD to the attacking team
b) When the ball was stripped from Simmons, it clearly travelled (one metre) backwards towards Manly - that is not in a forward direction
c) Foran's only contact with the ball was when it was held by Simmons - there was no separation, and therefore Foran did not knock the ball onto Simmons.

2. Is Sutton's justification for his decision, the hand direction of Foran at last contact with the ball? If so, does Harrigan agree that this interpretation is misguided as the rule on hand direction relates solely to passing a ball, and makes no reference at all to strips.

3. If Sutton's interpretation is approved, then will Harrigan consistently apply this new interpretation to all strip situations? For example if a tackler hits the ball with a forward motion when making a tackle and the ball pops out, then it will always be a knockon against the tackler because of the forward motion, irrespective of whether the ball travels forward or backwards?

 

[Blake]

Email this to the NRL and asked them to forward it to the refs. At least the NRL has a decent track record of replying to all the emails I've sent them so far.

 

[Canteen Worker]

That decision was ludicrous given the Benefit of Doubt decisions against Manly in the Souths game. The video refs are proving to be a joke!!!

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

Email this to the NRL and asked them to forward it to the refs. At least the NRL has a decent track record of replying to all the emails I've sent them so far.

Harrigoon is on talkinsport on Mondays at about 6:30 so send your emails to them

 

[Brookvale]

yep send it to talking sport.

Harrigon (Bill and Paul) is a CHEAT!

 

[The Eagle]

BE mate does talkin sport still do the podcast?

 

[Jethro]

Damn Referees. In my opinion, just about every time that Manly scores a try, the refs tend to send the decision upstairs to the video ref to look for every reason not to award the try (unless it was a definite try that they knew that they couldn't prove otherwise if they were to refer it upstairs), and if they can't find anything then we tend to get a lot of penalties straight after scoring for the opposition to try to even up the score (again, this is only my opinion).

 

[The Who]

My questions are much simpler:
1. In what way has the video ref improved the game?
2. Why are decisions based on slow motion action instead of normal speed? If it looks like a try at normal speed IT IS A TRY.

 

[The Eagle]

My questions would be after yesterday

< Comment Removed >

You've been told before The Eagle to keep your comments out of the gutter as there are kids who also access this forum and don't need to be subjected to the gutter comments that you persist on making.

Please keep your comments clean.

 

[Cameron]

My questions would be after yesterday

< Comment Removed >

come on mate thats OTT

Zorba is a premiership winning player and has lots a **** load of kgs

we should leave those sort of jokes to NRL officials and refs

 

[Peter C]

Harrigan said that BOD is given when they 100 percent can't prove that a try has NOT been scored

 

[Chip and Chase]

We established earlier on in the season with the Jamie Lyon "knock on" that direction of travel is of little consequence to the morons in the video box. Just add it to the list of f#ck ups these clowns have made this year.

 

[Shoe1]

My questions would be after yesterday

< Comment Removed >

This is an example of why my kids aren't allowed to access this site. This post is a disgrace.

 

[Stevo]

Harrigan said that BOD is given when they 100 percent can't prove that a try has NOT been scored

Ha ha. Nice one Harrigan. If a try has 100% not been scored then it is a no try and everything else is a try isn't it?

Benefit of the doubt is a disgrace. It's either a try or not a try.

If anything the benefit should go to the defending team. How can you award a try when you can't prove one has been scored? It's like saying "oh well, close enough is good enough!"

 

[DSM5]

Agreed Fonz, BOD should be no-try every time. Have control of the ball and put the ball on the grass = try. Everything else, no. Simple then.

 

[Brissie Kid]

Looks I need my eyes tested.

http://admin.nrl.com/official-view-carneys-pass-was-backwards/tabid/11010/newsid/63924/default.aspx

In the Manly v Penrith game, why did the video referee rule no-try when Kieran Foran stripped the ball from David Simmons?

There is no doubt that the ball was pulled out of Simmons' hands, and by the way the ball was spinning you can tell that it was pulled towards the opposition goal-line which means it is a knock-on. By looking at the rotation of the ball, it is always travelling towards the Panthers’ goal-line and it was always going to be called a knock-on.

 

[Dan]

That is a total BS answer.

If the player is still holding it then how does it get knocked on. If that is the case every tackle and dropped ball from a tackle is a knock on

 

[Brissie Kid]

Seems to completely ignore that Simmons' arm acts a counter to Foz's ripping motion, thus preventing the ball going forward when he loses it.

No wonder Rabbits on the call was as stunned as every Manly fan. No way that ball went forward.

Anyway from I could hear on tv I though the video ref and on field ref told the Manly players it wasn't a try because when Foz ripped it out it came forward INTO Simmons!

 

[Stevo]

I don't get what he's trying to say? Is he disputing that the ball was travelleng forward from Simmons therefore a knockback/rake from us?

 

[Brissie Kid]

He is saying it was a Manly knock forward as when Foz ripped the ball out it travelled forward towards Penrith's goal line.

In my view the video doesn't support that.

Foz's arm is ripping at the ball using a motion towards the Penrith line, but Simmonds' arm keeps holding the ball and stops it coming forward with Foz. Instead it spins up and towards the Manly line, which is a Manly knock back.

That's my view and obviously not the NRL's.