the no try-why not?

[castle eagle]

i was at the game (sitting in front of the family hill so no decent view of the big screen)& couldn't figure out why the manly try in the second half was dis-allowed. also what was the ensuing penalty for?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

They said Wolf was in front of Lyon when the ball came free so he was offside. Bit unlucky. Both Roosters scores had an element of luck, it was one of those games that could have gone either way.

 

[castle eagle]

well that clears it up,thanks

 

[globaleagle]

bump


lol

 

[Crusher_Cleal]

It unfortunately touched Lyon's leg just before Wolf grounded it. A bit unlucky in the end.

 

[Mals]

I was standing under the Fulton-Menzies stand so couldn't get a clear view either but didn't this happen in-goal? Since when can you be offside in-goal?!?

 

[Chip and Chase]

You can't be offside in your OWN in goal, I don't think that applies to the opposition's.

Just an unlucky fact that the ball hit Killers leg and Wolfie was in front of him.

 

[mmmdl]

What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?

 

[Shoe1]

What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?

True why not?

 

[MissKate]

Because klein was video ref and he made it his mission to find some reason to disallow what the on-field refs had called a try.

 

[mozgrame]

Poor Wolfie was laughing so hard too at the thought he had just scored the simplest of tries. I guess he should have let Glenn or Jamie have another go at it. lol

 

[Stevo]

What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?

Because a penalty over rules an error. :rules:

 

[mozgrame]

What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?

Because a penalty over rules an error. :rules:

Haha. Excellent! Short and sweet. Just the way Mrs K likes it.

 

[StuBoot]

What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?

True why not?

Just because it was 6 again doesn't mean the Chooks knocked it on, it may have gone backwards.

We were deadset unlucky on that, an accidental offside that wasn't even played at, the ball hit him.

We score that we win I reckon, we're 2nd and the Chooks "fail" their first big test, instead they're the real deal and we're on our knees.

It just goes to show that there is no deadset cert to win the comp.

If a bounce of the ball or a couple of 50/50's go against you it can be anybody's.