Penalty try? & Tedesco hit

Tigerheart_returns
Member
Member
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon 18 May, 2015 7:48 am

Penalty try? & Tedesco hit

Unread post by Tigerheart_returns » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 7:35 am

I don't know what a bloke has to do to get awarded one, but in my opinion (at the game) it looked like one should have been awarded. Was the call that there was some doubt as to whether the Tiger player (can't remember his name) would have grounded the ball?

Have to agree with JT on the Tedesco post penalty - wtf?

Overall, I felt for the boys, they must have been gutted but the signs were encouraging, I thought most of the new faces performed exceptionally well, considering who we were playing.


maxxy86
Member
Member
Posts: 1347
Joined: Fri 04 Mar, 2011 11:54 am
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 15 times

Unread post by maxxy86 » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 7:50 am

It was after Tedesco dropped the ball.....so in a way its fair play unless the refs, touchies or the bunker intervene. We defended softly that gave them the chance up the other end and scored with us having 1 less in the defence line.
Well its nearly time to have a 'CRACK'....Go you :sign:

User avatar
NJLM78
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 2641
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:51 pm
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 4 times

Unread post by NJLM78 » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 7:53 am

In the first half the bunker was happy to review a decision when JAC touched the ball before it went out over the touch-in-goal line. The Tigers couldn't have a 20m restart and had a goal line drop out instead. In the second half Tedesco is hit high, the Storm go down the field an score and then after the try is awarded the player is placed on report. We should have had a penalty 10m out instead of conceding points at the other end of the field.
I don't understand the penalty try. They awarded one to Manly in the 2013 grand final. Yet in a Round 7 game 2 and a half years on, no penalty try.

User avatar
NJLM78
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 2641
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:51 pm
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 4 times

Unread post by NJLM78 » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 7:58 am

maxxy86 wrote:It was after Tedesco dropped the ball.....so in a way its fair play unless the refs, touchies or the bunker intervene. We defended softly that gave them the chance up the other end and scored with us having 1 less in the defence line.



I was at the game and haven't watched a replay. I thought it went behind him and he fumbled for the ball as he was hit. Regardless of a knock on or knock back though, you cant then collect a player high, leave him on KO'd on the deck and have play on.

maxxy86
Member
Member
Posts: 1347
Joined: Fri 04 Mar, 2011 11:54 am
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 15 times

Unread post by maxxy86 » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:04 am

Unfortunately he was put on report after the try tbey scored......so I see it if we defended better after we spilt the ball and not let them score it would have come back for a penalty.
Well its nearly time to have a 'CRACK'....Go you :sign:


User avatar
stevied
Member
Member
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun 10 Jul, 2011 10:45 am
Been liked: 5 times

Unread post by stevied » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:12 am

Poor officiating. I don't agree that it was accidental and, whether accidental or not it, it was reckless. I agree, it should have gone back for a penalty to the Tigers. The penalty try was 50/50. Lawrence is not the quickest or most agile player and he doesn't have great hands either. The second half try to Koro was clearly from a forward pass just as the Storm's first try came after a knock on. I didn't see the replay of the Lawrence forward pass no try. Was it forward? Together with the trip on Moses, which should have been a sin bin, The Tigers were hard done by again. Not saying that their own mistakes didn't also contribute to the loss but we were definitely ripped off ........

Pawsandclaws
Member
Member
Posts: 2415
Joined: Sat 20 Jun, 2015 5:53 pm
Been liked: 60 times

Unread post by Pawsandclaws » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:18 am

I think the tripping incident should have resulted in a send off. The NRL is lucky a player has not been injured by this act of foul play.

Tuiaki Chicken Wings
Member
Member
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun 09 Mar, 2014 7:16 pm

Unread post by Tuiaki Chicken Wings » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:26 am

stevied wrote:Poor officiating. I don't agree that it was accidental and, whether accidental or not it, it was reckless. I agree, it should have gone back for a penalty to the Tigers. The penalty try was 50/50. Lawrence is not the quickest or most agile player and he doesn't have great hands either. The second half try to Koro was clearly from a forward pass just as the Storm's first try came after a knock on. I didn't see the replay of the Lawrence forward pass no try. Was it forward? Together with the trip on Moses, which should have been a sin bin, The Tigers were hard done by again. Not saying that their own mistakes didn't also contribute to the loss but we were definitely ripped off ........
Was standing right in line with it. Touchie was standing behind the pass and called it forward, was flat IMO. Ive seen alot worse not given. Amazes me how the touchies work the sidelines, I thought one was supposed to be inline with the 10m and one inline with the ruck?

maxxy86
Member
Member
Posts: 1347
Joined: Fri 04 Mar, 2011 11:54 am
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 15 times

Unread post by maxxy86 » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:27 am

A penalty try has to be 100% going to be a try, so I was fine with that. The attempted trip should have seen 10 in the bin IMO.
Well its nearly time to have a 'CRACK'....Go you :sign:

User avatar
mike
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 1545
Joined: Mon 28 Jun, 2010 8:32 pm
Location: Hornsby
Has liked: 18 times
Been liked: 20 times

Unread post by mike » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:32 am

Pawsandclaws wrote:I think the tripping incident should have resulted in a send off. The NRL is lucky a player has not been injured by this act of foul play.
I agree, should have been an automatic send off. Very dangerous, that's one way to end up with a broken leg. A cowardly act.
Western Suburbs supporter since 1960 | Balmain junior since 1967 | Wests Tigers supporter since 1999

User avatar
mike
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 1545
Joined: Mon 28 Jun, 2010 8:32 pm
Location: Hornsby
Has liked: 18 times
Been liked: 20 times

Unread post by mike » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:33 am

I couldn't have given a penalty try he was too far from the ball and could not be sure he would have scored. Penalty and sin bin was the correct decision.
Western Suburbs supporter since 1960 | Balmain junior since 1967 | Wests Tigers supporter since 1999

User avatar
Juro
Member
Member
Posts: 2588
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 9:15 am
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 4 times

Unread post by Juro » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:40 am

I think the logic of the penalty try not being given was that the ball kicked up on the next bounce. If it had been a friendlier bounce, they may have given it, but there was just too much doubt. I could live with that.

Having our try disallowed while Melbourne's was given, both off line-ball forward passes, was hard to swallow. We just never seem to get the luck with these calls.

No doubt about the trip needing a harsher penalty. Deliberate and dangerous!
I've been a member since 2012. We last played finals football in 2011. Just saying...

User avatar
Love the WestsTigers
Member
Member
Posts: 3101
Joined: Wed 21 Jul, 2010 12:03 pm
Location: Ex Ctown Resident Now Qlander
Has liked: 35 times
Been liked: 17 times

Unread post by Love the WestsTigers » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:43 am

The Lawrence one HAD to be a penalty try.
No arguments what so ever, he had miles of space to gather the ball and dive over

stevetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5117
Joined: Mon 25 Feb, 2013 7:59 am

Unread post by stevetiger » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:47 am

I thought the Lawrence decision was terrible.

User avatar
Tigertigertiger
Member
Member
Posts: 928
Joined: Tue 27 May, 2014 11:43 pm

Unread post by Tigertigertiger » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:50 am

The Lawrence one wasn't 100% clear cut so while I agree he most probably scores there is still doubt

The trip should have been 10 in the bin, it was deliberate,dangerous and what if he broke Moses leg in the act?

tigermac88
Member
Member
Posts: 854
Joined: Tue 21 Feb, 2012 12:53 pm
Has liked: 11 times
Been liked: 2 times

Unread post by tigermac88 » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 8:58 am

maxxy86 wrote:A penalty try has to be 100% going to be a try, so I was fine with that. The attempted trip should have seen 10 in the bin IMO.
That's where the problem lays with penalty tries... You can never be 100% certain a try will be scored in any situation. There will always be an argument for some doubt.

yeti
Member
Member
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue 08 Nov, 2011 5:38 pm
Been liked: 16 times

Unread post by yeti » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 9:05 am

I really think the officials 'expect' a team to win and a team to lose and they officiate accordingly. A team like the Tigers will not get the rub of the green when up against teams such as the Storm. I don't think it's deliberate - just an unconscious reaction to events as they unfold. In a close game, most of the 50/50 calls will go to the more favoured team. For the Tigers to beat the Storm by a point, they probably need to be a 10 point better side.

User avatar
underdog
Member
Member
Posts: 4805
Joined: Tue 27 Apr, 2010 5:25 pm
Location: Gold Coast
Has liked: 25 times
Been liked: 28 times

Unread post by underdog » Mon 18 Apr, 2016 9:23 am

mike wrote:I couldn't have given a penalty try he was too far from the ball and could not be sure he would have scored. Penalty and sin bin was the correct decision.
The thing is Lawrence was making ground at the rate of knots.

He would have comfortable gotten to the ball with half a metre to spare.
Image

Post Reply

Return to “Round 7: Wests Tigers vs Melbourne Storm”