Hull Kingston Bronco Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 4 hours ago, Saint 1 said: Ian Smith shares the decision, maybe it's the fans who are wrong. Ian Smith’s view is nonsense. The only person capable of making a tackle to prevent the try committed a foul, stopping an otherwise certain try. To hypothesise on what he might otherwise have done instead of fouling a player to prevent a try is the first step to madness… no foul would ever be given if we allowed the “yes, but if he hadn’t fouled him it would have been fair play” alternate hypothesis Absolute comedy of a decision, and ridiculous later justification Apparently this site says I "won the day" here on 23rd Jan, 19th Jan, 9th Jan also 13th December, whatever any of that means. Anyway, 4 times in a few weeks? The forum must be going to the dogs - you people need to seriously up your game. Where's Dutoni when you need him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Dockhouse Host Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 5 hours ago, Bostik Bailey said: What the rules regarding a voluntary tackle? Don't really exist anymore, called a surrender Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Dockhouse Host Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 1 hour ago, fighting irish said: I think it's arguable that Yaha would have made it to the line but Makinson's arm hitting his head was the difference between him (Yaha) being pushed into touch or not therefore, it should have been a penalty try. I also believe Maloney deserved some kind of retaliation, a penalty against him, ideally (when Matautia punched him) because he used the elbow/forearm initially but normally a retaliatory clean punch is punished with a sending off, (or at least a sin-bin). While we're at it, what about Maloney's kick to touch being batted back into play by a man who's foot touched the ground (out of play) before swatting the ball back onto the field. Oh and (here's one for unapologetic pedant) what about the last minute ruling against Tompkins for an incorrect 'play the ball'? There were scores of ''roll-balls'' throughout the game, but with minutes to go, suddenly it's a crucially important skill/rule (which just had to be enforced). I was disappointed with the standard of refereeing and I believe Catalans had the worst of it. He wasn't punished for roll ball you have to gain your feet and be in control to play the ball. Don't play the ball unless your set, if the defender is messing around the ref will call a pen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 10 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said: He wasn't punished for roll ball you have to gain your feet and be in control to play the ball. Don't play the ball unless your set, if the defender is messing around the ref will call a pen. Actually, you have to gain your feet, be in control and play the ball with your foot. But hey, that's only the laws of the game. The point is that punishing any offence at the play the ball is the height of irony when 99.9% of them are illegal. "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bod Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 The high part of the tackle was accidental. The rest was a Grand Final winning tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sentoffagain2 Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 1 hour ago, David Dockhouse Host said: He wasn't punished for roll ball you have to gain your feet and be in control to play the ball. Don't play the ball unless your set, if the defender is messing around the ref will call a pen. And lift the ball off the floor.You cant put your hand on the ball while it is still on the ground and play it backwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoubleD Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Dunbar said: Actually, you have to gain your feet, be in control and play the ball with your foot. But hey, that's only the laws of the game. The point is that punishing any offence at the play the ball is the height of irony when 99.9% of them are illegal. Attempt to play the ball with your foot I believe. Perhaps it is ironic but the refs have been consistent with this all season and that’s the most important thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 1 minute ago, DoubleD said: Attempt to play the ball with your foot I believe. Perhaps it is ironic but the refs have been consistent with this all season and that’s the most important thing. No, the laws say play it with the foot. Regain feet (b) The tackled player shall without delay regain his feet where he was tackled, lift the ball clear of the ground, face his opponent’s goal line and drop or place the ball on the ground in front of his foremost foot. Play with foot (e) When the ball touches the ground it must be heeled (i.e. backwards) by the tackled player. The ball must not be kicked or heeled by the player marking him. The ball is in play when it has been played backward. We just said attempt to play it with the foot as we started to erode the laws of the game and now of course the 'guidelines' don't include any mention of playing it with the foot as long as there is balance and control. "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
north yorks trinity Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, Dunbar said: Regain feet (b) The tackled player shall without delay regain his feet where he was tackled, lift the ball clear of the ground, face his opponent’s goal line and drop or place the ball on the ground in front of his foremost foot. Is there any possibility whatsoever that if a player chose the drop option that they wouldn't be pinged for a knock on? It would presumably then become a penalty should they choose to question the refs knowledge of the rules! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 1 minute ago, north yorks trinity said: Is there any possibility whatsoever that if a player chose the drop option that they wouldn't be pinged for a knock on? It would presumably then become a penalty should they choose to question the refs knowledge of the rules! Every possibility. In fact a certainty. It's one of the by-products of not following any of the laws any more that if someone actually does do what is written in the laws, they will be penalised. "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbruce Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, north yorks trinity said: Is there any possibility whatsoever that if a player chose the drop option that they wouldn't be pinged for a knock on? It would presumably then become a penalty should they choose to question the refs knowledge of the rules! No which is why quoting laws is pretty pointless as a lot of the time the refs have been given an interpretation that is very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hullste Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 3 hours ago, fighting irish said: I think it's arguable that Yaha would have made it to the line but Makinson's arm hitting his head was the difference between him (Yaha) being pushed into touch or not therefore, it should have been a penalty try. I also believe Maloney deserved some kind of retaliation, a penalty against him, ideally (when Matautia punched him) because he used the elbow/forearm initially but normally a retaliatory clean punch is punished with a sending off, (or at least a sin-bin). While we're at it, what about Maloney's kick to touch being batted back into play by a man who's foot touched the ground (out of play) before swatting the ball back onto the field. Oh and (here's one for unapologetic pedant) what about the last minute ruling against Tompkins for an incorrect 'play the ball'? There were scores of ''roll-balls'' throughout the game, but with minutes to go, suddenly it's a crucially important skill/rule (which just had to be enforced). I was disappointed with the standard of refereeing and I believe Catalans had the worst of it. What about the knees to the head from Yaha or the early high shot by Garcia on Lomax, under the current rules both are yellow card offences but both went unpunished. Tomkins was playing for a penalty and rightly penalised. Makinson contact was originally on the arm and momentum plus Yaha falling had an influence on where Makinson ended up. Penalty yes, penalty try never as he was going out from the original contact. Yellow harsh given that Garcia got away with one. Both teams can point to decisions that went against them in the game but unfortunately Guasch has thrown his toys out of his pram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tabby Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 8 hours ago, Dunbar said: Penalty try (d) the Referee may award a penalty try if, in his opinion, a try would have been scored but for the unfair play of the defending team. A penalty try is awarded between the goal posts irrespective of where the offence occurred. https://www.rugby-league.com/governance/rules-and-regulations/laws-of-the-game He sent it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, hullste said: Penalty yes, penalty try never as he was going out from the original contact. You can't say that though. The tackle was a foul and so for the decision on the penalty try you have to discount the tackle and say what would the outcome have been if that foul hadn't taken place. You can't split the tackle into two parts, the fair part and the foul part. Take Makinson out of that play (as his was the foul play) and you need to make a decision on whether the try would have been scored. "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tabby Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Dunbar said: You can't say that though. The tackle was a foul and so for the decision on the penalty try you have to discount the tackle and say what would the outcome have been if that foul hadn't taken place. You can't split the tackle into two parts, the fair part and the foul part. Take Makinson out of that play (as his was the foul play) and you need to make a decision on whether the try would have been scored. No foul he scores. Penalty try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubby Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 13 minutes ago, hullste said: What about the knees to the head from Yaha or the early high shot by Garcia on Lomax, under the current rules both are yellow card offences but both went unpunished. Tomkins was playing for a penalty and rightly penalised. Makinson contact was originally on the arm and momentum plus Yaha falling had an influence on where Makinson ended up. Penalty yes, penalty try never as he was going out from the original contact. Yellow harsh given that Garcia got away with one. Both teams can point to decisions that went against them in the game but unfortunately Guasch has thrown his toys out of his pram This shows the beginnings of Makinson sliding over the top. Had he not grabbed the head of Yaha he would have crawled over the line IMO. It was a foul and no one else is in the frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hullste Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 6 minutes ago, Scubby said: This shows the beginnings of Makinson sliding over the top. Had he not grabbed the head of Yaha he would have crawled over the line IMO. It was a foul and no one else is in the frame. The photo also shows that his body is going towards the touch line from the original contact. It is not 100% certain that he wouldn't have gone into touch so can't give a penalty try. The only penalty trys I see given is when a player is already over the line when the foul play is committed. It was reviewed by the video ref and he agreed with the ref. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubby Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, hullste said: The photo also shows that his body is going towards the touch line from the original contact. It is not 100% certain that he wouldn't have gone into touch so can't give a penalty try. The only penalty trys I see given is when a player is already over the line when the foul play is committed. It was reviewed by the video ref and he agreed with the ref. The question is would he have scored if Makinson wasn't there? Makinson was there and committed a foul with a head shot. I think you would struggle to break a tackle into 2 parts tbh. Seems to have divided opinion for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 No two ways about that, the foul stopped a certain try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Padge Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 8 hours ago, DEANO said: What the rules about playing the ball? None, we have Laws not rules. Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007 Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king" This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hullste Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Johnoco said: There was a penalty earlier in the game when Roby was tackled by ?? (I forget) which started as a tackle round his chest and it ended up round his head. The penalty was given. It wasn’t ignored and an explanation of ‘he didn’t mean it and started off ok’ used. Makinson doesn’t foul Yaha, he definitely scores, it’s literally that simple. If it was that simple we would see penalty tries given far more frequently but they aren't. Can you answer why Garcia (direct Head contact on Lomax) wasn't a yellow card or an 8 point try and a yellow for Yaha weren't given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Padge Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 34 minutes ago, Johnoco said: No because I wasn’t the ref and it was a separate incident. But I don’t need to be a qualified ref to know that if a player has an open run to the line, is fouled, and as a result doesn’t score when he definitely would have done, then it’s a penalty try. Define ' definitely would have done', as I see it , it is your opinion that he would have, other opinions are available. Not saying you are right or wrong in your assessment just pointing out your's is one of many possible views. Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007 Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king" This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeordieSaint Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 I said it on here during the game, and having just watched the BBC highlights, I haven’t changed my mind. Definitely a penalty try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayCee Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 TM's covering tackle stops YF from scoring.The tackle stops the try so no penalty try. The tackle ends up with head contact and any headshot ends in a sin binning. The officials were spot on IMO. My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/ It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course. It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sentoffagain2 Posted October 10, 2021 Share Posted October 10, 2021 1 hour ago, GeordieSaint said: I said it on here during the game, and having just watched the BBC highlights, I haven’t changed my mind. Definitely a penalty try. Can you guarantee that the tackle would have had enough momentum to take the winger over the sideline.If the ball is static over the line and the attacking player is taken out who can say that he would touch it down without a fumble its all guesswork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.