Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chris22

Worst referreing decision to benefit your team...

Recommended Posts

Since we still have 3 weeks of the off season left, thought we might have another very much off season topic. The majority seem to enjoy slagging off referees, sometimes to an obsessive extent, so I thought we would flip it! What is the worst refereeing decision you can remember than has benefitted your team?

I'll start with Saints...a disallowed Bradford try in the 2002 Grand Final that would have put the Bulls up 12-0 after around 10 minutes. It was ruled a knock on against a Bradford player despite clearly being stripped by Paul Newlove. How different things could have been if that try was awarded!

 

  • Like 3

Twitter: @TrylineBlog 
Latest Blog: Great Britain vs Australia 2006 - Watchalong! - LINK: https://thetryline.blogspot.com/2020/03/tryline-blog-watch-along-2.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris Green being given onside by Steve Ganson (video referee) against Rovers at Magic Weekend 2013.

Outrageous call, but hilarious consequences.

Edited by Wellsy4HullFC
  • Like 5

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a last tackle play Benji Marshall dropped the ball then kicked it through the defence, ran through to re-gather and scored. It was a blatant knock-on and everyone watching knew it. The Video Ref decided that there was no law saying you can't drop-kick a grubber kick through the line and allowed the try. Would have been maybe 2014.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Farmduck said:

On a last tackle play Benji Marshall dropped the ball then kicked it through the defence, ran through to re-gather and scored. It was a blatant knock-on and everyone watching knew it. The Video Ref decided that there was no law saying you can't drop-kick a grubber kick through the line and allowed the try. Would have been maybe 2014.

If the ball didn't touch the ground before Marshal kicked it then it was a correct decision, as per this rule from the Laws of the Game.

Accidental 2. If, after knocking-on accidentally, the player knocking-on regains or kicks the ball before it touches the ground, a goal post, cross bar or an opponent, then play shall be allowed to proceed.

If that was the case and yet "everybody knew it was a knock on" that shows how much the average fan (and possibly player / coach) knows about the actual laws of the game

Edited by RL does what Sky says

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

If the ball didn't touch the ground before Marshal kicked it then it was a correct decision, as per this rule from the Laws of the Game.

Accidental 2. If, after knocking-on accidentally, the player knocking-on regains or kicks the ball before it touches the ground, a goal post, cross bar or an opponent, then play shall be allowed to proceed.

If that was the case and yet "everybody knew it was a knock on" that shows how much the average fan (and possibly player / coach) knows about the actual laws of the game

No, it was a knock-on. He dropped the ball and it hit the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a ball bouncing off a dog at a Hull Dockers game v Skirlaugh at the Willows.  The chasing winger picked the ball up and put it down over the line.  Referee was Ian Scott I think.  Not sure who the dog was attached to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Farmduck said:

No, it was a knock-on. He dropped the ball and it hit the ground.

OK, fair enough.

It just seems odd that a referee (or video referee) would allow play to continue after such a blatant knock on - and which at least the video referee must have seen due to him having given the ruling as you stated.

In no way am I saying it shouldn't have been given as a knock-on but the only other reason I can think of is that the video referee considered he had deliberately dropped the ball in front of him in order to kick it. In which case the video referee in the incident you explain would be correct in saying there is no law to prevent such an action.

An anomaly within the laws of the game is that a knock-on is given if a player drops the ball on the ground in front him, yet he has to do just that in order to attempt a drop-goal or a drop-kick when sometimes restarting play. The player could be trying for such a drop-goal and just miscue his kick, but if the referee judges he was attempting such a kick then play can continue (ie the same player could just pick the ball up again) as long as he has kicked the ball in the process.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember the  Hull Fat Boys bossing the show against Cas when the ref gave one of those 'nothing' penalties against Hull. A freakish series of events led to cas overcoming a healthy lead to win in short order.

Not an overly bad decision as just not necessary. If the hadn''t given it nobody would have even noticed yet he did and probably the best team lost.

I've read that a Ref doesn't affect the result of a game which makes me wonder- what is he there for if he doesn't?


Rah Rah Emissary:  Our Bigotry will blot out the sun.

Legio XIII:                  Then we shall play in the shade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off the top of my head, and ignoring the Magic game vs Bradford which doesn't count, this game always amuses me. Agent Thaler strikes again for Leeds in a big game 🙂

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably the knock-on decision against Michael Withers in ‘99. I question whether Saints would have had the period of dominance we had and whether we’d have become Bradford’s bogey side in big games without it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

Probably the knock-on decision against Michael Withers in ‘99. I question whether Saints would have had the period of dominance we had and whether we’d have become Bradford’s bogey side in big games without it. 

I know what you are saying but I wouldn’t call that or the “voluntary tackle” the worst refereeing decisions as both were 50/50 calls. Either could be classed as most important but on both decisions you could argue either way. We certainly came out on the right side of those decisions though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

I know what you are saying but I wouldn’t call that or the “voluntary tackle” the worst refereeing decisions as both were 50/50 calls.

The voluntary tackle was most certainly not a 50-50 call. The Saints' just fell to the ground without anyone touching him. The law is as follows ...

Voluntary tackle 4. A player in possession shall not deliberately and unnecessarily allow himself to be tackled by voluntarily falling to the ground when not held by an opponent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RL does what Sky says said:

The voluntary tackle was most certainly not a 50-50 call. The Saints' just fell to the ground without anyone touching him. The law is as follows ...

Voluntary tackle 4. A player in possession shall not deliberately and unnecessarily allow himself to be tackled by voluntarily falling to the ground when not held by an opponent. 

Exactly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RL does what Sky says said:

The voluntary tackle was most certainly not a 50-50 call. The Saints' just fell to the ground without anyone touching him. The law is as follows ...

Voluntary tackle 4. A player in possession shall not deliberately and unnecessarily allow himself to be tackled by voluntarily falling to the ground when not held by an opponent. 

Didn’t read your first bit I thought you were backing me up as Joynt didn’t allow himself to be tackled he got up again. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Voluntary tackle 4. A player in possession shall not deliberately and unnecessarily allow himself to be tackled by voluntarily falling to the ground when not held by an opponent. 

You see that literally every week now being ignored . Makes me laugh in the NRL when a guy runs behind his mate and then just collapses down on the deck . The defenders should just let them lie there and force his hand 

Edited by DavidM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

The voluntary tackle was most certainly not a 50-50 call. The Saints' just fell to the ground without anyone touching him. The law is as follows ...

Voluntary tackle 4. A player in possession shall not deliberately and unnecessarily allow himself to be tackled by voluntarily falling to the ground when not held by an opponent. 

As a neutral, I thought it was 50-50, because the Bradford player almost 'dummied' the tackle, and let Joynt fall to the floor. It was 6 of 1 and half a dozen of the other for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Didn’t read your first bit I thought you were backing me up as Joynt didn’t allow himself to be tackled he got up again. 

Exactly. And if the Bradford bloke (Deacon possibly) hadn't moved out of the way, then he'd just have tackled him normally anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

As a neutral, I thought it was 50-50, because the Bradford player almost 'dummied' the tackle, and let Joynt fall to the floor. It was 6 of 1 and half a dozen of the other for me.

I disagree with that ... Joynt still can't just throw himself down.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RL does what Sky says said:

I disagree with that ... Joynt still can't just throw himself down.

Is Joynt's action any different to a surrender tackle that we see every week? The difference is that Deacon jumped out of the way at the last minute, trying to fish for a penalty. That's arguably as, if not more, unsporting. As bobbruce says, Joynt got back up again and played on anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, M j M said:

Off the top of my head, and ignoring the Magic game vs Bradford which doesn't count, this game always amuses me. Agent Thaler strikes again for Leeds in a big game 🙂

 

Lol I really liked Thaler as a ref after that haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mumby Magic said:

Surely a Rhino fan will put on the Magic W/end debacle.

Surely a Bulls fan would bring it up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...