Tackle on Ryan without the ball.

sunshine coast tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 1041
Joined: Tue 16 Mar, 2010 5:40 pm
Location: Back in Sydney

Tackle on Ryan without the ball.

Post by sunshine coast tiger » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:35 am

I thought it denied Ryan the chance to regain the ball after dropping it and should have been a penalty.

Does anyone know what Bill Harragian said on 2SM about it? The commentators were going to ask him but I couldn't listen to that segment.


User avatar
alex
Member
Member
Posts: 3624
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 7:58 pm
Location: Haberfield

Post by alex » Tue 04 May, 2010 7:18 am

If anyone watched the ANZAC Day game and saw the penalty try involving Matt Cooper, then I'm sure they'd agree this should've been denied

Marshall_magic
Member
Member
Posts: 4237
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 5:33 pm

Post by Marshall_magic » Tue 04 May, 2010 5:40 pm

alex wrote:If anyone watched the ANZAC Day game and saw the penalty try involving Matt Cooper, then I'm sure they'd agree this should've been denied
completely different. Ryan dropped the ball, then Minichiello hit him. No time to pull out of the tackle. Cooper never touched the ball, was clearly going to score the try, and a Roosters player out of play grabbed his shorts to deny him a fair try.

User avatar
Long Distance Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 468
Joined: Fri 21 Aug, 2009 12:18 pm

Post by Long Distance Tiger » Tue 04 May, 2010 5:45 pm

According to the blokes on the ABC it doesn't matter whether Minicello had time to pull out or not ......... it shpuld have been a penalty. It's a moot point anyway, we should have been at least 20 points in front by then and no-one would care whether they scored or not.

User avatar
Balmain Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 1299
Joined: Tue 08 Sep, 2009 7:41 pm
Location: Inner West

Post by Balmain Tiger » Tue 04 May, 2010 5:48 pm

i doubt it was a fair try, mini never had balls for the ball, only ryan
Image


tomcat
Member
Member
Posts: 1443
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 5:11 am

Post by tomcat » Tue 04 May, 2010 5:50 pm

frair try , mini was committed to the tackle, and if you watch it again , mini didn't actually tackle him, more of a grab..
EVERYBODY WANTS TO GO TO HEAVEN, BUT NOBODY WANTS TO DIE..

User avatar
simonthetiger
Member
Member
Posts: 3396
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:12 pm

Post by simonthetiger » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:04 pm

How was it a try???

A bloke without the ball got tackled......smashed in fact.

I couldnt give a hoot how much time he had to pull out.

The simple fact is you cant deny a bloke a chance to go for the ball when he doesnt have it.

User avatar
Balmain Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 1299
Joined: Tue 08 Sep, 2009 7:41 pm
Location: Inner West

Post by Balmain Tiger » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:06 pm

tomcat wrote:frair try , mini was committed to the tackle, and if you watch it again , mini didn't actually tackle him, more of a grab..
doesnt really matter if it was a grab or not, it obstructed him getting to the ball
Image

User avatar
smeghead
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
Posts: 9451
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 11:56 pm

Post by smeghead » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:13 pm

Hit him in the process of trying to regather.

Very harsh call.

As Farah said how is it benefit of the doubt? It is either a try or no try. Benefit of the doubt seems to mean they examined his intent which is not the way the rule is written. The intent is meaningless
Image

User avatar
Aladinsane
Member
Member
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 3:03 pm
Location: Cabarita

Post by Aladinsane » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:14 pm

100% NO TRY .......and in the refs training meeting regarding that" try", all the refs agree except for one , that it was a mistake to award it as a try .....we were robbed again for those 2 vital points

User avatar
Geo.
Member
Member
Posts: 27863
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 10:55 pm
Location: Sandy Point NSW..

Post by Geo. » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:21 pm

Boo hoo look at the scoreboard was what my Rorter supporting Son said to me....and I hadn't even said anything....

As crap as it was if Beau makes the very difficult catch it's a non issue....then again I'm sure Checkin would have found another way....
Ivan's Laws

1. You are either on the Bus or you are off..
2. The Star of the Team is the Team
3. Be the player your teammates want to play with..
happy tiger wrote:
Mon 11 Jun, 2018 10:03 pm


Sorry FT , you know I'm not the brightest match in the pile

User avatar
smeghead
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
Posts: 9451
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 11:56 pm

Post by smeghead » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:23 pm

Simple solution. Take your son in hand and deal with him in an "old scholl" Orana Park fashion.
Image

User avatar
willow
Member
Member
Posts: 32204
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 9:28 pm
Location: The Village

Post by willow » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:46 pm

simonthetiger wrote:How was it a try???

A bloke without the ball got tackled......smashed in fact.

I couldnt give a hoot how much time he had to pull out.

The simple fact is you cant deny a bloke a chance to go for the ball when he doesnt have it.
Exactly. It should have been NO TRY irrespective of Minichello not being able to pull out of the tackle. You can't tackle a bloke without the ball, it's that simple.

Marshall_magic
Member
Member
Posts: 4237
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 5:33 pm

Post by Marshall_magic » Tue 04 May, 2010 6:51 pm

Aladinsane wrote:100% NO TRY .......and in the refs training meeting regarding that" try", all the refs agree except for one , that it was a mistake to award it as a try .....we were robbed again for those 2 vital points
We weren't robbed of anything. We had so many chances to win that game, but our attack was inept. We should've won it by 20, so we didn't need to worry about dubious calls.

Benson

Post by Benson » Tue 04 May, 2010 8:41 pm

willow wrote:
simonthetiger wrote:How was it a try???

A bloke without the ball got tackled......smashed in fact.

I couldnt give a hoot how much time he had to pull out.

The simple fact is you cant deny a bloke a chance to go for the ball when he doesnt have it.
Exactly. It should have been NO TRY irrespective of Minichello not being able to pull out of the tackle. You can't tackle a bloke without the ball, it's that simple.
What concerns me is, this wasn't even a formidable team.

User avatar
smeghead
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
Posts: 9451
Joined: Fri 10 Jul, 2009 11:56 pm

Post by smeghead » Tue 04 May, 2010 8:48 pm

True Benson but sometimes it takes an ugly win against a so-so team to start the bal lrolling again
Image

User avatar
tigergirlz
Member
Member
Posts: 2627
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 10:09 pm

Post by tigergirlz » Tue 04 May, 2010 8:56 pm

Just hope this isn't one of those events that comes back to bite us on the bum at the end of the seaon.

User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 17200
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains

Post by Cultured Bogan » Tue 04 May, 2010 8:58 pm

Geo. wrote:Boo hoo look at the scoreboard was what my Rorter supporting Son said to me....and I hadn't even said anything....

As crap as it was if Beau makes the very difficult catch it's a non issue....then again I'm sure Checkin would have found another way....
You have a son Geo? Nonetheless a Rorters supporting son? What went wrong mate?!
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!

Cuando llegue el día, y estoy parado a las puertas del cielo, será Dios pidiendo mi perdón...

Locked