Refs on Tigers tries
Moderator: GH Moderators
Refs on Tigers tries
Not to be finicky but these really got my back up.
In their first try they have a guy standing in an offside position taking up a bit of space where he should be, i think it was there number 3, who cleared away space from the defender who let the try in.
The second one, someone runs a line at the outside shoulder of our defender, i think lui, who doesnt dive but never makes up for it leaving a bit of space for corey thompson to run through, i thnink lawrence was the player. If they are going to be so sensitive over our tries, imo line runners who run at the outside shoulder of a slidfing defence, where they are mile in front of the play and in the defensive line, should be penalised every time whether a try is given or not.
In their first try they have a guy standing in an offside position taking up a bit of space where he should be, i think it was there number 3, who cleared away space from the defender who let the try in.
The second one, someone runs a line at the outside shoulder of our defender, i think lui, who doesnt dive but never makes up for it leaving a bit of space for corey thompson to run through, i thnink lawrence was the player. If they are going to be so sensitive over our tries, imo line runners who run at the outside shoulder of a slidfing defence, where they are mile in front of the play and in the defensive line, should be penalised every time whether a try is given or not.
Re: Refs on tigers tries
I didn’t agree with our no try decisions. But the refs were correct to award tries to Tigers.
Re: Refs on tigers tries
Yeah I think it was Packer who didn't actually run through the line. It comes back to football smarts IMO. Our defender/s needed to make it known that he was impeded instead of being so passive.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12656
- Joined: April 29, 2017, 7:22 pm
- Favourite Player: Ashley Gilbert
Re: Refs on tigers tries
Not sure what the answer is but some smart footy folks need to get around a table with a big bowl on mentos in the middle and clean this up. Not good for the game that exciting tries get over ruled due to technical infringements and spectators can't celebrate tries until after the obligatory review.
Re: Refs on tigers tries
I only had a drama with the Boyd one on put down
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Edrick The Entertainer
- Northern Raider
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 32584
- Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
- Location: Greener pastures
Re: Refs on tigers tries
Boyd try they completely stuffed up. It was moot anyway as we scored next play. I had no real issue with the other calls. Tigers tries were fine. Wighton no-try was technically the correct ruling. Tiger player just made sure he was obstructed.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
- -PJ-
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 24836
- Joined: May 8, 2010, 1:58 pm
- Favourite Player: Josh Papalii
- Location: 416.9 km from GIO Stadium
Re: Refs on tigers tries
"We have a try, can you check obstruction ?"
3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment..Old Faithful
#emptythetank
#emptythetank
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
They need to make it like the TMO in union
They only check what the ref asks to be checked
"I have a try check grounding" "Grounding confirmed you may award the try" takes about 3 seconds
They only check what the ref asks to be checked
"I have a try check grounding" "Grounding confirmed you may award the try" takes about 3 seconds
Re: Refs on tigers tries
Yeah i dont really know what the complaints about the tigers tries could be
They were both a direct result of woeful defensive reads.
Papalii with eyes only for the back man and completely whiffed on Lawrance, and then Blake Austin having a mild stroke on our goal line.
They were both a direct result of woeful defensive reads.
Papalii with eyes only for the back man and completely whiffed on Lawrance, and then Blake Austin having a mild stroke on our goal line.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
on the second try the tigers decoy should not run a line at the outside shoulder of the defender, it actually created the space that allowed thompson through.
we still should have tackled him, but the defender was just sliding he didnt make a decision to tackle the decoy.
we still should have tackled him, but the defender was just sliding he didnt make a decision to tackle the decoy.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
Yeah... na.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
He didn't interfere with anyone.. it was Blake Austin cutting back through the middle of the ruck and **** up the numbers
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16706
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I didn’t notice anything in the Tigers tries. I did notice one of their repeat sets was through a gap made by an obstruction.
And of course anyone in the game day thread knows my opinion on the two Raider no trys.
And of course anyone in the game day thread knows my opinion on the two Raider no trys.
- Matt
- Don Furner
- Posts: 38872
- Joined: May 18, 2010, 4:17 pm
- Favourite Player: Time for the new breed Savage, Mooney, Timoko
- Location: Canberra
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I had no issues with the referees this week.
I had lots of issues with the bunker this week.
I had lots of issues with the bunker this week.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
If I had a replay, you would all feel me.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
First Tigers try at 37 seconds. Austin does get caught up by a player standing next to the ruck but Wighton doesn't get across to make the tackle. It really is just poor defence on the line, someone needs to commit to the lead runner and it needs to be the inside defender.
Second Tigers try at 1:02. The Tigers lead runner runs through the line but instead of coming up with the line and the lead runner hitting his outside shoulder he hangs off completely and leaves the gap. Probably could have turned it into an obstruction but didn't as he didn't come up with the line. Poor defensive play, nothing to see here.
- Northern Raider
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 32584
- Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
- Location: Greener pastures
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
Thanks pickles. You are spot on in the assessment. With the first one the Tigers player was about to go to dummy half then backs off. Austin tangled with him momentarily then proceeded to run across field to his defensive position and well past the play which cut back infield. Austin never got onside anyway so penalty Tigers if you want to really analyse it.
Second one was actually a well executed decoy run. He went to the line without contacting any defender and the ball was passed behind him. No chance thats going to be called obstruction.
Second one was actually a well executed decoy run. He went to the line without contacting any defender and the ball was passed behind him. No chance thats going to be called obstruction.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
-
- Jason Croker
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: July 26, 2015, 8:24 pm
- Favourite Player: Croker, Cotric, Sezer
- Location: The Land of Lime Green
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I cannot believe this.
After that howler of a performance in the bunker this weekend, Klein has been appointed to ref Origin.
The contempt from the NRL is breathtaking. And where is our apology or admission of the error from the NRL? Haven't seen it yet...
After that howler of a performance in the bunker this weekend, Klein has been appointed to ref Origin.
The contempt from the NRL is breathtaking. And where is our apology or admission of the error from the NRL? Haven't seen it yet...
And to all the people who doubted me, hello to them as well. - Mark Webber, Raiders Ballboy and Unluckiest F1 Driver Ever
I'm attacking in the right way, instead of just...attacking in the general direction. - Max Aaron (also eerily apropos for the Green Machine)
I'm attacking in the right way, instead of just...attacking in the general direction. - Max Aaron (also eerily apropos for the Green Machine)
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
for the second try that highlights package doesnt show the lead up properly of the tigers runner he actually does make a bit of contact with lui which creates the space, im pretty sure that without that contact and him being in that space lui is able to make up for the 2 cms thompson got his try by.
the highlights do show lui out of position, if u see the full replays you will see he is out of position because of the obstruction by the lead runner.
the highlights do show lui out of position, if u see the full replays you will see he is out of position because of the obstruction by the lead runner.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16706
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
Can you imagine if that decision was against the Broncos!? He’d never ref again!raiderskater wrote:I cannot believe this.
After that howler of a performance in the bunker this weekend, Klein has been appointed to ref Origin.
The contempt from the NRL is breathtaking. And where is our apology or admission of the error from the NRL? Haven't seen it yet...
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I was behind the posts at that end, there was no obstructionpapabear wrote:for the second try that highlights package doesnt show the lead up properly of the tigers runner he actually does make a bit of contact with lui which creates the space, im pretty sure that without that contact and him being in that space lui is able to make up for the 2 cms thompson got his try by.
the highlights do show lui out of position, if u see the full replays you will see he is out of position because of the obstruction by the lead runner.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I was fine with the Tigers tries.. Was poorly defended by us. The first one especially was due to Austin confusing our own defence when he was trying to get back into position after making a tackle.
The video refs were a farce though with the Boyd No Try. On field ref did ask for the grounding to be checked, but at the bottom line is that it was sent up as a Try and the video ref did not have sufficient evidence to over turn it, but it looks like the video ref through the decision was sent up as No Try. Idiot.
The video refs were a farce though with the Boyd No Try. On field ref did ask for the grounding to be checked, but at the bottom line is that it was sent up as a Try and the video ref did not have sufficient evidence to over turn it, but it looks like the video ref through the decision was sent up as No Try. Idiot.
2012, 2014 and 2015 Boogs Avatar/Signature of the Year
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
There’s no evidence on the replay of the audio to suggest that. The Fox commentary suggested that, but there seems to be no bunker audio to suggest they thought that. They simply over ruled as they claimed there was no vision of the ball on the ground. But neither was there conclusive evidence it was not on the ground. Simply inconsistent with the protocol. We’ve had no explanation but for the bunker Twitter tweet issued at 6:16pm, after the game.Aero wrote: ↑June 20, 2018, 5:12 am I was fine with the Tigers tries.. Was poorly defended by us. The first one especially was due to Austin confusing our own defence when he was trying to get back into position after making a tackle.
The video refs were a farce though with the Boyd No Try. On field ref did ask for the grounding to be checked, but at the bottom line is that it was sent up as a Try and the video ref did not have sufficient evidence to over turn it, but it looks like the video ref through the decision was sent up as No Try. Idiot.
72nd Min: #NRLTigersRaiders
No Try @RaidersCanberra.
Croker is behind ball carrier which makes him a support player. Eisenhuth has two hands under the ball and holds the ball up.
#NRL
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
It would be nice if they admitted the stuff up but I suppose no one is asking given the context of the game.
- reptar
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16061
- Joined: January 25, 2005, 9:24 pm
- Favourite Player: Jordan Rapana
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I'd be annoyed if we missed out on the 8 due to a 4 point F/A differential. Mind you, we did score the very next play.
Gina Riley: Oh, come on, John. That’s a bit old hat, the corrupt IOC delegate.
John Clarke: Old hat? Gina, in the scientific world when they see that something is happening again and again and again, repeatedly, they don’t call it old hat. They call it a pattern.
John Clarke: Old hat? Gina, in the scientific world when they see that something is happening again and again and again, repeatedly, they don’t call it old hat. They call it a pattern.
- zim
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 10694
- Joined: July 8, 2015, 3:38 pm
- Favourite Player: NRL: Joseph Tapine
NRLW: Grace Kemp - Location: Sydney
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
- reptar
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16061
- Joined: January 25, 2005, 9:24 pm
- Favourite Player: Jordan Rapana
- Location: Brisbane
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
That annoys me now
Gina Riley: Oh, come on, John. That’s a bit old hat, the corrupt IOC delegate.
John Clarke: Old hat? Gina, in the scientific world when they see that something is happening again and again and again, repeatedly, they don’t call it old hat. They call it a pattern.
John Clarke: Old hat? Gina, in the scientific world when they see that something is happening again and again and again, repeatedly, they don’t call it old hat. They call it a pattern.
-
- David Furner
- Posts: 3879
- Joined: May 31, 2015, 7:25 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I agree ZIM - the Raiders review should focus on our own issues. That would be a culture of accountability.
But the refs should also review on their accountability. Given Ashleigh Klown has been named as assistant referee for Origin 2, I would say that their has been no internal consequence of that howler.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
Raiders season review: We was robbed we was
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I am not saying we were robbed. Nor am I saying that the refs cost us anything. We obviously find new and creative ways to lose all on our own.
All I posted this thread for was to find the right vision, and discuss it, and there has been a lot of discussion and some vision but i just need a little more!!
All im saying is the refs did a poor job, the second try, im fairly certain does not get scored if lui doesnt get bumped by packer i think it was bumping his outside shoulder in an illegal position in front of the ball.
One day I will get the vision i need and show it.
All I posted this thread for was to find the right vision, and discuss it, and there has been a lot of discussion and some vision but i just need a little more!!
All im saying is the refs did a poor job, the second try, im fairly certain does not get scored if lui doesnt get bumped by packer i think it was bumping his outside shoulder in an illegal position in front of the ball.
One day I will get the vision i need and show it.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
I had no issue with either of the Tigers tries. More an issue of our poor defensive reads imo. But like everyone else, the Boyd 'no try' ruling is a farce. Perhaps Mr De-Klein doesn't like working in the Bunker and has made a decision in a game where such a decision has no impact on the outcome, so he doesn't get back there again.
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
It was definitely sent up as TRY and grounding was asked to be checkedgreeneyed wrote: ↑June 20, 2018, 6:03 amThere’s no evidence on the replay of the audio to suggest that. The Fox commentary suggested that, but there seems to be no bunker audio to suggest they thought that. They simply over ruled as they claimed there was no vision of the ball on the ground. But neither was there conclusive evidence it was not on the ground. Simply inconsistent with the protocol. We’ve had no explanation but for the bunker Twitter tweet issued at 6:16pm, after the game.Aero wrote: ↑June 20, 2018, 5:12 am I was fine with the Tigers tries.. Was poorly defended by us. The first one especially was due to Austin confusing our own defence when he was trying to get back into position after making a tackle.
The video refs were a farce though with the Boyd No Try. On field ref did ask for the grounding to be checked, but at the bottom line is that it was sent up as a Try and the video ref did not have sufficient evidence to over turn it, but it looks like the video ref through the decision was sent up as No Try. Idiot.
72nd Min: #NRLTigersRaiders
No Try @RaidersCanberra.
Croker is behind ball carrier which makes him a support player. Eisenhuth has two hands under the ball and holds the ball up.
#NRL
https://www.9now.com.au/2018-nrl-premie ... episode-46 - 1:36:05 - a bit hard to hear over Gus going off, but the on field ref says to check "..and through to grounding".
Regardless of whether it was asked to be checked or not, there was no sufficient evidence to overturn the original Try call. The only reason I can think of why they hit the No Try button would be because the video ref completely forgot what the original decision was. Has the ref's boss said anything about that decision?
2012, 2014 and 2015 Boogs Avatar/Signature of the Year
Re: Refs on Tigers tries
@Aero No he hasn’t.