Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:17 am  

ok to set it among pidgeons.
the ball bounced back towards fax. so where the ten metres from as was no catcher. then when someone went to catch the ball it was black.
as usual RFL rules conflict with each other.

so if a player puts up a kick and then races forward to catch his own kick then passes it to a teammate alongside him who goes over to score. would not be a try if teamate was in front of him when kicked.
rubbish.

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:38 am  

swifty62 wrote:

so if a player puts up a kick and then races forward to catch his own kick then passes it to a teammate alongside him who goes over to score. would not be a try if teamate was in front of him when kicked.
rubbish.

That would depend if player 2 had interfered with play before being played onside again by player 1 (the kicker). The offence has already occured by interfering with play from an offside position so what happens afterwards is irrelevant.

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 10:54 am  

Leyther_Matt wrote:

That would depend if player 2 had interfered with play before being played onside again by player 1 (the kicker). The offence has already occured by interfering with play from an offside position so what happens afterwards is irrelevant.

but is it really that clear?

In all cases where an offside player is within 10 meters of a catcher, whether he interferes or not, a penalty should be given, under rule 14-2

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 11:18 am  

Ive jut watched the replay and i cant honestly see why the try was disallowed. When the ball bounces Ben Black has already ran past Gannon putting him onside. Blacky works really hard to do this and does it within the letter of the law and should have been rewarded. Gannon approached the ref and asked why it was disallowed and had discussions with him and i sort of get the impression that he didnt know why it had been ruled off either saying it was the video refs decision.

Saying all that the refs decision to not penalise Littler in the second half was crucial to the outcome, he could have also pinned Leigh for offside in the following tackle but chose not to. Overall you didnt really notice the ref and that is usally a sign that he is having a very good game, god help us if Ronnie the Viking had been in charge.

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 2:30 pm  

spanishbob wrote:

but is it really that clear?

In all cases where an offside player is within 10 meters of a catcher, whether he interferes or not, a penalty should be given, under rule 14-2

Is this the answer in the video refs eyes??

If we read the rule carefully just being in the 10 and in front of the kicker technically warrants a penalty whether you get involved or not and this player cannot be put on side if the kicker runs past him because he was not only in front but also in the 10, however.

A penalty would not always be given, one way to avoid the penalty would be to as prevoiusly stated "warn the infinging player" such as give him 10 and if the player warned does not get involved (which Jim did by touching the ball) and the defending side gets the ball back or is not disadvantaged (which Leigh were by Fax scoring the try) then play will be allowed to carry on with the prevoiusly defending side now in possession.

Jim was the only player that was deemed to be both in front of Ben Black and within the 10 but was not warned by the ref because of the fine margins and complexities involved.

Even with multiple viewings there is a lot of uncertainty and each one will have their own views on it, it was a tough call but I arn't going to dwell on it.

The Beswick one is more contentious as it was willfull and seen by the ref and may have been worth 10 in the bin for Mr Littler, no advantage was gained and should have been a penalty.

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 2:34 pm  

faxcar wrote:

Is this the answer in the video refs eyes??

If we read the rule carefully just being in the 10 and in front of the kicker technically warrants a penalty whether you get involved or not and this player cannot be put on side if the kicker runs past him because he was not only in front but also in the 10, however.

A penalty would not always be given, one way to avoid the penalty would be to as prevoiusly stated "warn the infinging player" such as give him 10 and if the player warned does not get involved (which Jim did by touching the ball) and the defending side gets the ball back or is not disadvantaged (which Leigh were by Fax scoring the try) then play will be allowed to carry on with the prevoiusly defending side now in possession.

Jim was the only player that was deemed to be both in front of Ben Black and within the 10 but was not warned by the ref because of the fine margins and complexities involved.

Even with multiple viewings there is a lot of uncertainty and each one will have their own views on it.

The Beswick one is more contentious as it was willfull and as such may have been worth 10 in the bin for Mr Littler, no advantage was gained and should have been a penalty.

I dont agree with everything you put, but that just shows how complex the rules of the game and their interpretations are. I do however completely agree that Littler should have been sin-binned and we should have had a penalty.

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 2:44 pm  

I am not saying what I personally think just trying to play the video ref to see how he would have thought about it and rightly or wrongly he judged Jim to be both in front, in the 10, to have interfered and Leigh to have been disadvantaged because of those 3 things equalling penalty.

Also just talking it over to sort of get a better understanding and see what others think of one of the more not so obvious rules.

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:04 pm  

faxcar wrote:

I am not saying what I personally think just trying to play the video ref to see how he would have thought about it and rightly or wrongly he judged Jim to be both in front, in the 10, to have interfered and Leigh to have been disadvantaged because of those 3 things equalling penalty.

Also just talking it over to sort of get a better understanding and see what others think of one of the more not so obvious rules.

oh. Then I agree with you. I am sure thats how the video ref saw it. If Gannon hadnt touched it then he might have accepted that he didnt interfere and let it go. Its not an easy rule to follow.

Anyhow, onwards and upwards. If Sheffield, Widnes and Barrow would just loose the rest of their games and we can win the remainder of games then 4th or 5th place could be available.

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:09 pm  

Just seen it again and I think it was a harsh one but I trust in a referee of Bentham's experience to make the right call. That said, I thought it was equally harsh to disallow Riddy's try as Jones just ran straight in to Littler who did nowt other than stand his ground as he's entitled to do.

Re: Offside or not : Tue Jul 19, 2011 3:13 pm  

Leyther_Matt wrote:

Just seen it again and I think it was a harsh one but I trust in a referee of Bentham's experience to make the right call. That said, I thought it was equally harsh to disallow Riddy's try as Jones just ran straight in to Littler who did nowt other than stand his ground as he's entitled to do.

To be honest I thought that too. If it had been the other way I would have been saying exactly the same.

But then it was wrong not to sin bin Littler.

There is always things to discuss about the game, but nothing can detract from the scores in the record. We had our opportunities to close the game off and didnt take them, Leigh did.

All that said, even though we lost I am glad we were there playing in the game and we just need to get our heads right for the remaining games of the season.