|
|
|
|
01 Jan 1970 12:00 PM |
||
| # | Player | T | Pts | TA | LB | TB | OFF | Ta | MT | IT | Pos | DR | K | KM | M | E | P |
|---|
| # | Player | T | Pts | TA | LB | TB | OFF | Ta | MT | IT | Pos | DR | K | KM | M | E | P |
|---|
Or a quick bunker check...this is material to the outcome guys, give me some guidance please....?
i.stuff.co.nz
Well waddyaknow, we woz robbed - and the NRL agree!
NRL confirms refs got it wrong in controversial late penalty against Warriors in loss to Storm
NRL admits controversial late call should have been scrum to the Warriors, not a penalty against them.
NRL confirms refs got it wrong in controversial late penalty against Warriors in loss to Storm
David Long
The NRL's head of football elite competitions Graham Annesley says the referees got it wrong in awarding the controversial penalty that led to the Warriors losing to the Storm.
The Storm defeated the Warriors 13-12 on Anzac Day, in circumstances that infuriated Warriors fans.
With four minutes left and trailing by two points, a penalty was awarded close to the Warriors line, with the referees ruling that Adam Blair and Isaiah Papali'i slowed down Jesse Bromwich being able to take a quick play-the-ball.
The ball did make its way to Storm hooker Cameron Smith, who then knocked it on.
Cameron Munster goaled the penalty and then a minute later Brodie Croft kicked the field goal to hand the Warriors a heartbreaking loss.
Warriors coach Stephen Kearney was clearly upset with the call in his post-match press conference and in Annesley's weekly media address he stated the referees made a mistake and it should have been a scrum to the Warriors for the knock-on.
PHOTOSPORT
The Storm were given a controversial penalty in the last few minutes of their game against the Warriors.
"There are two tacklers involved, both have got their arms around him (Bromwich)," Annesley said as he ran through footage of the incident.
"Gets up, tries to play the ball with the defence still on him, makes a mess of the play the ball, Cameron Smith knocks on and the whole play breaks down.
"The question for the referees to decide was if the tacklers were too slow to get off, or did the player in possession try to play the ball too quickly?
"We've looked at it quite a few times this morning and we think on balance that probably the play-the-ball was too quick, before the defence had time to release.
GETTY IMAGES
Graham Annesley addressed the media on Monday around the week seven action.
"But you can understand the dilemma the referees had here, in that you've got a play-the-ball you can't accept, you can't play on from this, there's a knock on from dummy half for a start.
"The referees have to determine whether that's been caused by the ball carrier trying to play the ball before the defenders have had a chance to release, or if the defenders had time to release and they've interfered with the play-the-ball.
"On balance, we think a scrum would have been a better outcome, but it's very difficult to blame the referees for that decision in a split second."
The referees were Matt Cecchin and Dave Munro and even though they got the call wrong, Annesley said there wouldn't be any punishment for them.
"Even though I think a scrum would have been a better outcome, is it the sort of decision where you can take action against the infield decision? Well it just doesn't fall into that category," he said.
Annesley said it was the most controversial moment in round seven, but felt that this was because it was a decision that played a part in the result of the game.
"In the context of the game, I can understand why there is a large degree of controversy around this penalty," he said.
"If you move that incident into 10 minutes into the first half, it doesn't even raise a mention at any stage during or after the game, but in the context of the game, it's a massive call.
"But it's one where you certainly can't hang the referees over that outcome when you look at what they were confronted with."
Hypothetically if the ref calls a scrum, does it give the bunker the opportunity to advise the ref to overturn the decision if its clearly evident that there was interference in the play the ball? Or would the decision still stand? Just thinking in those doubtful situations the ref should be calling a scrum. However would hate to see the game slowed in any way for the bunker to be making multiple checks.
It’s up to Kearney to pull a Sticky and call them out
What did the nrl say about this? The lines person gets it wrong......sorry (until next time)
Not even Annesley gets it. The whole problem is the ref never called surrender tackle ffs. What a bunch of numpties.Well waddyaknow, we woz robbed - and the NRL agree!
NRL confirms refs got it wrong in controversial late penalty against Warriors in loss to Storm
NRL admits controversial late call should have been scrum to the Warriors, not a penalty against them.
NRL confirms refs got it wrong in controversial late penalty against Warriors in loss to Storm
David Long
The NRL's head of football elite competitions Graham Annesley says the referees got it wrong in awarding the controversial penalty that led to the Warriors losing to the Storm.
The Storm defeated the Warriors 13-12 on Anzac Day, in circumstances that infuriated Warriors fans.
With four minutes left and trailing by two points, a penalty was awarded close to the Warriors line, with the referees ruling that Adam Blair and Isaiah Papali'i slowed down Jesse Bromwich being able to take a quick play-the-ball.
The ball did make its way to Storm hooker Cameron Smith, who then knocked it on.
Cameron Munster goaled the penalty and then a minute later Brodie Croft kicked the field goal to hand the Warriors a heartbreaking loss.
Warriors coach Stephen Kearney was clearly upset with the call in his post-match press conference and in Annesley's weekly media address he stated the referees made a mistake and it should have been a scrum to the Warriors for the knock-on.
PHOTOSPORT
The Storm were given a controversial penalty in the last few minutes of their game against the Warriors.
"There are two tacklers involved, both have got their arms around him (Bromwich)," Annesley said as he ran through footage of the incident.
"Gets up, tries to play the ball with the defence still on him, makes a mess of the play the ball, Cameron Smith knocks on and the whole play breaks down.
"The question for the referees to decide was if the tacklers were too slow to get off, or did the player in possession try to play the ball too quickly?
"We've looked at it quite a few times this morning and we think on balance that probably the play-the-ball was too quick, before the defence had time to release.
GETTY IMAGES
Graham Annesley addressed the media on Monday around the week seven action.
"But you can understand the dilemma the referees had here, in that you've got a play-the-ball you can't accept, you can't play on from this, there's a knock on from dummy half for a start.
"The referees have to determine whether that's been caused by the ball carrier trying to play the ball before the defenders have had a chance to release, or if the defenders had time to release and they've interfered with the play-the-ball.
"On balance, we think a scrum would have been a better outcome, but it's very difficult to blame the referees for that decision in a split second."
The referees were Matt Cecchin and Dave Munro and even though they got the call wrong, Annesley said there wouldn't be any punishment for them.
"Even though I think a scrum would have been a better outcome, is it the sort of decision where you can take action against the infield decision? Well it just doesn't fall into that category," he said.
Annesley said it was the most controversial moment in round seven, but felt that this was because it was a decision that played a part in the result of the game.
"In the context of the game, I can understand why there is a large degree of controversy around this penalty," he said.
"If you move that incident into 10 minutes into the first half, it doesn't even raise a mention at any stage during or after the game, but in the context of the game, it's a massive call.
"But it's one where you certainly can't hang the referees over that outcome when you look at what they were confronted with."
The thing that pisses me off is Cecchin made the call 10m back with an obstructed view. Papalii was looking at the other ref to tell him the call. Penalty or no penalty, we got done by the refs more than once that night.
not allowed to go to the bunker while play is ongoing. If they had called a scrum, it could have been overturned by the bunker (which wouldnt have surprised me) but as they didnt.
At the game, and from my angle his head was lower than his body as he went down and it looked as though he was going to land on it. live it looked really bad. The TV shows it differently, and live I had no trouble with the penalty. I assume that the ref who called the play was the one at my end of the pitch and had a similar view?
It was one of 3 piggy back calls Storm conviently got out of their red zone when we had them under the pump. There was nothing wrong with the tackle, just poor reffing.
looking at the replayyour right. live i got it wrong as well, just like the ref.
12 May
24 - 12
Compiled from 8 ratings
