Souths Penalty Try

[Chip and Chase]

Does anyone else think that the decision to award Inglis a penalty try was a tad generous ? My understanding of a penalty try is for situations where an illegal act stops a definite try. Inglis still had to catch the ball, get to the line and then ground it. Granted the odds were in his favour, but how often have we seen players tackled and rolled over to prevent a grounding when a try looked certain. I wonder if they would have been so generous if that was the try that put souths ahead in a closer game.

 

[bones]

They got it right IMO. Maybe it was a BODPT :S

 

[niccipops]

I think Foran actually touched the ball in the lead up to this try.

 

[Volley]

I was fine with it. If you aren't going to give a penalty try for that, you may as well ditch the rule.

 

[captainskin]

I was fine with it as well. Inglis just had to fall over the line with a little momentum on his side.

 

[Peter C]

Definitly BODPT,as Inglis was tackled a fraction before his hands touched the bal,l as the defending player grabbed him from behind and didn't really know for certain whether he was in possession of the ball.
Can live with the penalty try, no problem if it was just a penalty,but I don't think it warranted a sin bin.

 

[Kiwi Eagle]

I thought it should be a penalty try, but have seen plenty of those not given over the last few years. Case in point being Billy Slater in the Anzac test earlier this year, was even more clear cut than last night

1 big question I do have is how Ferguson didn't also march off for 10mins ?

 

[mozgrame]

Penalty try for sure. Inglis ended up sitting on the try line almost. If he had the ball, he just needed to roll over. No sinbin.

 

[simon64]

I think Foran actually touched the ball in the lead up to this try.

Oh Nicci.........one of your best.

 

[Volley]

I thought it should be a penalty try, but have seen plenty of those not given over the last few years. Case in point being Billy Slater in the Anzac test earlier this year, was even more clear cut than last night

1 big question I do have is how Ferguson didn't also march off for 10mins ?

They tend to either give a penalty try, or use the sin bin. Not both. A penalty try and sin bin is a pretty heavy penalty to pay.

 

[Brissie Kid]

Based on the way this has been handled in the past it was a very generous decision.

He had to catch the ball so I don't know how the referee could be certain.

Also if the defender had waited to tackle him legally there is even less certainty he would have scored.

But it is Souths so no one will turn it into a controversy.

 

[Jethro]

I think Foran actually touched the ball in the lead up to this try.

Yeah, maybe it was one of the same game day balls from the night before. 😛

 

[ads]

I was fine with it. If you aren't going to give a penalty try for that, you may as well ditch the rule.

Exactly how I feel. The issue isn't this one - its that they've been so reluctant to use it other times.

---

I thought it should be a penalty try, but have seen plenty of those not given over the last few years. Case in point being Billy Slater in the Anzac test earlier this year, was even more clear cut than last night

1 big question I do have is how Ferguson didn't also march off for 10mins ?

They tend to either give a penalty try, or use the sin bin. Not both. A penalty try and sin bin is a pretty heavy penalty to pay.

Yeah this is apparently the official policy - they said after the Origin one. So sometimes its actually in your favour not to get a penalty try and have the other team down a person.

 

[Chip and Chase]

I guess one thing that concerns me is that there are dozens of examples through the season where tries have been prevented by miracle tackles that hold the player up over the line. In this case Inlis does end up pretty well on the line, but he is sliding on his bottom and in the process of being pulled back, so no moral to have grounded it IMO. Ferguson is no slouch so it's not like Inglis brushes him off with ease, if he waits the extra half a stride till Inglis touches he ball he is still in great position to drag hm down backwards like he did and prevent the try.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

I think Foran actually touched the ball in the lead up to this try.

Haha. I was also amazed that Matai escaped getting cited over this incident.

 

[ads]

I guess one thing that concerns me is that there are dozens of examples through the season where tries have been prevented by miracle tackles that hold the player up over the line. In this case Inlis does end up pretty well on the line, but he is sliding on his bottom and in the process of being pulled back, so no moral to have grounded it IMO. Ferguson is no slouch so it's not like Inglis brushes him off with ease, if he waits the extra half a stride till Inglis touches he ball he is still in great position to drag hm down backwards like he did and prevent the try.

My view is that if your team has done something that is worth a penalty try you lose the right to get a shot at a miracle play. The rule should only be most likely to score rather than having to be certain.

 

[ManlyBacker]

Bookies refuse to pay out on Inglis try
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/bookies-refuse-to-pay-out-on-greg-inglis-penalty-try/story-e6frexnr-1226475397733

 

[Chip and Chase]

That's fair enough from the TAB, the penalty try is an option so no way should they pay out on Inglis.

 

[Frank]

I was fine with it. If you aren't going to give a penalty try for that, you may as well ditch the rule.

Exactly how I feel. The issue isn't this one - its that they've been so reluctant to use it other times.

---

I thought it should be a penalty try, but have seen plenty of those not given over the last few years. Case in point being Billy Slater in the Anzac test earlier this year, was even more clear cut than last night

1 big question I do have is how Ferguson didn't also march off for 10mins ?

They tend to either give a penalty try, or use the sin bin. Not both. A penalty try and sin bin is a pretty heavy penalty to pay.

Yeah this is apparently the official policy - they said after the Origin one. So sometimes its actually in your favour not to get a penalty try and have the other team down a person.

---

I fail to see how it could be an advantage to give up a certain penalty try in favour of an opposition team being a player down for 10 minutes. Just because a team is down to 12 men doesn't make the other team certainties to score.

The old saying "a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush" comes to mind.

 

[ads]

I was fine with it. If you aren't going to give a penalty try for that, you may as well ditch the rule.

Exactly how I feel. The issue isn't this one - its that they've been so reluctant to use it other times.

---

I thought it should be a penalty try, but have seen plenty of those not given over the last few years. Case in point being Billy Slater in the Anzac test earlier this year, was even more clear cut than last night

1 big question I do have is how Ferguson didn't also march off for 10mins ?

They tend to either give a penalty try, or use the sin bin. Not both. A penalty try and sin bin is a pretty heavy penalty to pay.

Yeah this is apparently the official policy - they said after the Origin one. So sometimes its actually in your favour not to get a penalty try and have the other team down a person.

---

I fail to see how it could be an advantage to give up a certain penalty try in favour of an opposition team being a player down for 10 minutes. Just because a team is down to 12 men doesn't make the other team certainties to score.

The old saying "a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush" comes to mind.

---

I thought in Origin it worked in NSW favour that QLD were down a player. Of course there is no way of knowing what would have happened the other way around.