: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:42 am  

bewildered wrote:

at the game I thought Smith was guff, but on looking back at some of the decissions now I can see where he was coming from. A few I didn't understand were:

Webbs disallowed try. Lee Smith was adjudged to have been obstructing but in my opinion he jumped, had his eyes on the ball and was playing for it so i dont see the issue with that try not been given.

The Warrington try that was not allowed was a little 50-50. for me i would have given it really. Diskin was sucked in by Clarke and that was that. i think had Clarke carried on moving across towards the ruck it may just have been given but he stop and it did appear in the replay that he stepped into Diskin. Also had it not come just after Webbs disallowed try it may have been given, who knows.


The one that annoyed me was Anderson getting away with 2 ball steals. OK they were 1 on 1 but they clearly went forward thus a scrum to us. its not hard to spot a ball going forward really

Webb no try imo. Initally Lee Smith was intending to go for the ball but he really miss timed the jump which gave the vid ref no option but to award no try as he got no where near the ball.

The Anderson ball steels i share the same opinion. Clear knock ons. But yet when Ali did the same Smith saw it as a knock on.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:47 am  

I thought that the some of the ball steal decisions were made by the touch judges.
On the matter of the VR decisions I thought the Smith decision could have gone either way, without the VR we may have got that one.
However, without the VR I don't think that McGuire's try would have been given.
So you win some, you lose some.
But it does seem to me that the video refs are always looking for reasons to disallow tries rather than giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:48 am  

Gotcha wrote:

The Warrington no try was spot on.

Thaler has video reffed obstructions that way all season consistently.

However, personally I didn't see it as obstruction. If you read the rules it should have been dissallowed for offside.

Attacking players must be 5 yards behind the play the ball unless immediately behind the play the ball. Clarke was stood level with the play the ball 8 yards away and interfering with play. Therefore he is offside, and a penalty to the defence.

That is not strictly true but it was clear to me after watching the video replay that he has pinged the Warrington player not for obstruction but for advancing too soon into an offside position... which of course drew Diskin to leave the gap. As such Ben was correct. Of course on Sky when I watched it back Pinky and Perky got it wrong and confused anyone watching by claiming it was disallowed for obstruction.

The rules are reasonably clear -

Retire at play- (g) players of the side not in possession other than
the-ball the player taking part in the play-the-ball and the
acting half back are out of play if they fail to retire
ten (10) metres from the point at which the ball is
played or to their own goal lines. Players of the
side in possession other than the player taking
part in the play-the-ball and the acting halfback
must retire behind their players involved in the
play-the-ball or to their own goal line.

If you watch, when the acting half back clears the ruck the Warrington player was in an offside position.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 1:35 pm  

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote:

That is not strictly true but it was clear to me after watching the video replay that he has pinged the Warrington player not for obstruction but for advancing too soon into an offside position... which of course drew Diskin to leave the gap. As such Ben was correct. Of course on Sky when I watched it back Pinky and Perky got it wrong and confused anyone watching by claiming it was disallowed for obstruction.

The rules are reasonably clear -

Retire at play- (g) players of the side not in possession other than
the-ball the player taking part in the play-the-ball and the
acting half back are out of play if they fail to retire
ten (10) metres from the point at which the ball is
played or to their own goal lines. Players of the
side in possession other than the player taking
part in the play-the-ball and the acting halfback
must retire behind their players involved in the
play-the-ball or to their own goal line.

If you watch, when the acting half back clears the ruck the Warrington player was in an offside position.

tvoc will be delighted ... he's been waiting for this to happen since the disallowed Burrow try at Odsal

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 3:09 pm  

King Whino wrote:

tvoc will be delighted ... he's been waiting for this to happen since the disallowed Burrow try at Odsal

Well not so fast. You mean when Webb was pinged for offside and put Burrow away?

I think Webb was quite rightly pulled up because he broke offside rule 2... because he started to run/take part in play before he was passed by the ball carrying player. If Webb had just simply stood still with his arms above his head, waited to be passed, then started to run he would have been ok. I seem to recall that tvoc and I agree that it was not a try but do not agree on the reason.

Out of Play 2. An off side player shall not take any part in the game
or attempt in any way to influence the course of the
game. He shall not encroach within ten metres of an
opponent who is waiting for the ball and shall
Retire ten metres immediately retire ten metres from any opponent
who first secures possession of the ball.


Placed onside 3. An off side player is placed onside if:
(a) an opponent moves ten metres or more with the
ball.
(b) an opponent touches the ball without retaining it.
(c) one of his own team in possession of the ball
runs in front of him.
(d) one of his own team kicks or knocks the ball
forward and takes up a position in front of him in
the field of play.
(e) he retires behind the point where the ball was last
touched by one of his own team.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 3:24 pm  

King Whino wrote:

tvoc will be delighted ... he's been waiting for this to happen since the disallowed Burrow try at Odsal

The opposite really as I was predicting (at Easter) that it wouldn't happen again this season.

Does anyone know the official explanation as to why the Harrison 'try' was disallowed by Thaler? Obstruction or Offside at the PTB?

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 3:25 pm  

tvoc wrote:

The opposite really as I was predicting (at Easter) that it wouldn't happen again this season.

Actually in your defence. What you said is that when it happens (which is not often) it will get pulled. Which is what happened on Saturday.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 4:10 pm  

tvoc wrote:

The opposite really as I was predicting (at Easter) that it wouldn't happen again this season.

Does anyone know the official explanation as to why the Harrison 'try' was disallowed by Thaler? Obstruction or Offside at the PTB?

Wrong call and one which robbed Warrington.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 4:17 pm  

tvoc wrote:

The opposite really as I was predicting (at Easter) that it wouldn't happen again this season.

Does anyone know the official explanation as to why the Harrison 'try' was disallowed by Thaler? Obstruction or Offside at the PTB?

I thought Hemmings had declared the ruling by the VR as .... Offside

but will have to listen to the replay for verification.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 4:18 pm  

Anyone talking about offside being the reason for the disallowed try is talking nonesense and it is completely different to the Webb incident earlier in the season for many reasons, e.g. Clarke was behind the play the ball not in front, and Clarke didn't receive the ball.

You can clearly hear Ian Smith say on the microphone that it was because Clarke used his right arm to block Diskin. In my opinion it was an awful decision which rewarded a poor read in defence.

On the other hand the Webb no try was also a doubtful call though slightly harder to call.