That conversion attempt

Post Reply
happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 37756
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

That conversion attempt

Post by happy tiger » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 10:15 pm

Look I know it wasn't that easy to tell but Richards last conversion attempt looked to go directly over the left post

Should the referee had sent that upstairs ?? Or can they even send it upstairs ??

Thoughts ??


User avatar
softlaw
Member
Member
Posts: 3707
Joined: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 9:43 pm
Location: The Monaro. South of Canberra.

Post by softlaw » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 10:18 pm

Agreed, I thought it was good. Thankfully it, like the try after the siren last week, didn;t affect the result. But the hits on our for and against are adding up.
On the bus or under it!
Your choice.

User avatar
Eye Of Da Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 2012
Joined: Wed 16 Jan, 2013 10:49 pm

Post by Eye Of Da Tiger » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 10:27 pm

I was In front of it looked over for all money??

larrycorowa
Member
Member
Posts: 1828
Joined: Fri 19 Feb, 2010 1:47 pm

Post by larrycorowa » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 10:29 pm

over left post at worse of not a little inside.....

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9272
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Post by Yossarian » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 10:39 pm

It looked like it missed on TV


User avatar
stryker
Member
Member
Posts: 10825
Joined: Sun 19 Jul, 2009 4:16 pm
Location: Cairns

Post by stryker » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 10:59 pm

My first impression was it missed but would like another look to be sure. You could be right Hap.

User avatar
NJLM78
Member
Member
Posts: 2628
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:51 pm

Post by NJLM78 » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 11:08 pm

Once both touch judges wave it away the referee cannot over rule or check it. If one says yes and the other no, the referee then decides.

User avatar
Winnipeg
Member
Member
Posts: 1152
Joined: Fri 15 Jan, 2010 6:57 pm

Post by Winnipeg » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 11:41 pm

That famous post.

Good to see it getting another try assist to add to its one in 2005 against the cows!

User avatar
pHyR3
Member
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: Tue 12 Feb, 2013 7:11 pm

Post by pHyR3 » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 11:52 pm

the fact it was about 100m up in the air probably didn't help.

what's the rule if it is above one of the posts? cause it's 50/50 whether it hits it and deflects out or in assuming the postis a bit taller.
''Everybody talks about their four brothers, we have 17 here so we don't really care about them."

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

Post by alex » Sat 12 Apr, 2014 11:54 pm

The dodgiest kick of the night was Thurston's first penalty attempt. Five minutes in and on the attack, they went for the two. I immediately looked around for Ryan Tandy

User avatar
Sataris
Member
Member
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed 15 Jul, 2009 7:22 pm
Contact:

Post by Sataris » Wed 16 Apr, 2014 10:44 am

pHyR3 wrote:the fact it was about 100m up in the air probably didn't help.

what's the rule if it is above one of the posts? cause it's 50/50 whether it hits it and deflects out or in assuming the postis a bit taller.
Rule is the posts are assumed to extend to infinity.
cunno wrote:Ennis is the koala of the NRL.
Home of the Sataris

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 37756
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Wed 16 Apr, 2014 11:31 am

Sataris wrote:
pHyR3 wrote:the fact it was about 100m up in the air probably didn't help.

what's the rule if it is above one of the posts? cause it's 50/50 whether it hits it and deflects out or in assuming the postis a bit taller.
Rule is the posts are assumed to extend to infinity.
Unless the rule has changed recently if the ball goes directly above the post it is a goal

derailed
Member
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 8:10 am
Location: Summer Hill

Post by derailed » Wed 16 Apr, 2014 11:36 am

happy tiger wrote:
Sataris wrote:
pHyR3 wrote:the fact it was about 100m up in the air probably didn't help.

what's the rule if it is above one of the posts? cause it's 50/50 whether it hits it and deflects out or in assuming the postis a bit taller.
Rule is the posts are assumed to extend to infinity.
Unless the rule has changed recently if the ball goes directly above the post it is a goal
Sataris is right. Over the post is no goal.

happy tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 37756
Joined: Sun 27 Feb, 2011 4:49 pm

Post by happy tiger » Wed 16 Apr, 2014 11:45 am

derailed wrote:
happy tiger wrote:
Sataris wrote:
pHyR3 wrote:the fact it was about 100m up in the air probably didn't help.

what's the rule if it is above one of the posts? cause it's 50/50 whether it hits it and deflects out or in assuming the postis a bit taller.
Rule is the posts are assumed to extend to infinity.
Unless the rule has changed recently if the ball goes directly above the post it is a goal
Sataris is right. Over the post is no goal.
Well they have definitely changed the rule then in the last 30 odd years

Can remember a Rugby League show in Brisbane talking about this very subject in regards to a game in the old BRL when the had a one up one down with the touchies and the referee ruled it was a goal

When one of the panellist Bernie Pramburg commented he said over the post is a goal

He was an recently retired ex referee at the time

Newtown
Member
Member
Posts: 5223
Joined: Fri 28 Sep, 2012 8:40 am

Post by Newtown » Wed 16 Apr, 2014 11:56 am

Maybe Wests Tigers should follow Dragons' lead and insist to the NRL that the following point adjustments be made;
1. Due to the no try which Manly scored after half time had passed at Leichhardt - Reduce Wests Tigers Against points by six.
2. Add two points for Richards disputed goal against Cowboys.

These points may prove crucial if for and against are looked at season's end. If it's fair enough for Dragons it's fair enough for Wests Tigers. I am not being pedantic but if Dragons somehow succeed in getting two points for last Monday's game then Melbourne must lose two points otherwise four points would have been awarded for one match and this would be unfair to all other teams in the competition when points are taken into account prior to semi-final time.

larrycorowa
Member
Member
Posts: 1828
Joined: Fri 19 Feb, 2010 1:47 pm

Post by larrycorowa » Wed 16 Apr, 2014 4:23 pm

watched the replay.....it missed

User avatar
prattenpark
Member
Member
Posts: 933
Joined: Tue 02 Mar, 2010 4:02 pm

Post by prattenpark » Thu 17 Apr, 2014 2:11 pm

Flags were up, it was in.

derailed
Member
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 8:10 am
Location: Summer Hill

Post by derailed » Thu 17 Apr, 2014 3:51 pm

prattenpark wrote:Flags were up, it was in.
Who's flags. Both touchies waved it away, if they had put their flags up it would have been given as there is no way that ref can overall the touch judges on goal kicks

Post Reply