Bunker

User avatar
Winnipeg
Member
Member
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri 15 Jan, 2010 6:57 pm

Re: Bunker

Unread post by Winnipeg » Sun 22 May, 2016 12:57 am

Fade To Black wrote:
wd in perth wrote:Try to Ballin, try to Knights - no obstruction. I also say try to Moses which was called back near the end. And I totally agree, we never, ever seem to get 5o/50 calls when a try is being ruled upon, nor when there's a high shot. ava had to go off damn it and there was no penalty yet twice the knights received penalties for lesser impact above the shoulders contact.
Absolutely. It would be interesting to see why the refs called a penalty on those 2 plays.......there was a very long pause between the tackle and the ref blowing the penalty. Ava stayed down just like those 2 Knights players did but we got jack.
I also agreed, Ava should have gotten a penalty based on the ones the Knights received which were soft as.

No consistency


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

Unread post by Tigerheart_returns » Sun 22 May, 2016 12:35 pm

did the bunker get it right?

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 36471
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Unread post by happy tiger » Sun 22 May, 2016 12:48 pm

Don't blame the bunker , blame the ref that sent it up as a no try

Also blame the NRL , all tries should be sent to the bunker without bias

User avatar
CocaCola
Member
Member
Posts: 453
Joined: Wed 23 Feb, 2011 3:06 pm

Unread post by CocaCola » Sun 22 May, 2016 12:49 pm

Bunker made the correct call (inconclusive evidence). They had to go with refs call.

southerntiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 4204
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Sydney

Unread post by southerntiger » Sun 22 May, 2016 12:53 pm

happy tiger wrote:Don't blame the bunker , blame the ref that sent it up as a no try

Also blame the NRL , all tries should be sent to the bunker without bias
And what happens if its inconclusive? How would the bunker have decided yesterday if there was no "refs call"?

I like the current rule. Places emphasis on the ref to get it right. If the bunker can't prove the ref was wrong, then Im happy to live with that decision. It means the bunker is only there as a fail safe not as proxy for the ref.


happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 36471
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Unread post by happy tiger » Sun 22 May, 2016 1:09 pm

southerntiger wrote:
happy tiger wrote:Don't blame the bunker , blame the ref that sent it up as a no try

Also blame the NRL , all tries should be sent to the bunker without bias
And what happens if its inconclusive? How would the bunker have decided yesterday if there was no "refs call"?

I like the current rule. Places emphasis on the ref to get it right. If the bunker can't prove the ref was wrong, then Im happy to live with that decision. It means the bunker is only there as a fail safe not as proxy for the ref.
Benefit of the Doubt ST

southerntiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 4204
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Sydney

Unread post by southerntiger » Sun 22 May, 2016 1:34 pm

happy tiger wrote:
southerntiger wrote:
happy tiger wrote:Don't blame the bunker , blame the ref that sent it up as a no try

Also blame the NRL , all tries should be sent to the bunker without bias
And what happens if its inconclusive? How would the bunker have decided yesterday if there was no "refs call"?

I like the current rule. Places emphasis on the ref to get it right. If the bunker can't prove the ref was wrong, then Im happy to live with that decision. It means the bunker is only there as a fail safe not as proxy for the ref.
Benefit of the Doubt ST
Didn't work, which is why they changed the rule. I much prefer the current rule.

We also need a culture change. We are one of the few sports where people obsess over referee decisions. Phil Gould is partly to blame for this. Just accept the refs decision and move on.

User avatar
Swordy
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 1681
Joined: Fri 02 Jul, 2010 9:34 pm

Unread post by Swordy » Sun 22 May, 2016 2:39 pm

Just accept the no try call. Just accept the two balls on the field joke. Just accept Lawrences no penalty try call against the storm at Leichhardt...the list goes on.

Just accept, accept, accept.

50/50's i can cop, because thats life. 80/20's is just not fair.
Sunshine Coast resident.
Tigers fan since birth in 1969.
Fond memories of Leichhardt Oval every home game as a kid with my Dad!

southerntiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 4204
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 6:24 pm
Location: Sydney

Unread post by southerntiger » Sun 22 May, 2016 2:47 pm

Swordy wrote:Just accept the no try call. Just accept the two balls on the field joke. Just accept Lawrences no penalty try call against the storm at Leichhardt...the list goes on.

Just accept, accept, accept.

50/50's i can cop, because thats life. 80/20's is just not fair.
Yep because it works out in the end. Good example is the knock on call against Mamo in the first half yesterday. Ridiculous call. Probably 99/1 if you want use percentages. It went our way and I will take it but clearly the wrong call.

Post Reply

Return to “Round 11: Wests Tigers vs Newcastle Knights”

cron