stryker 69
Well-known member
I hope the club is giving Annesley a tough time.
Legitimately getting screwed out of wins.
Legitimately getting screwed out of wins.
Tuilagi NO TRY..
- Thread starter Geo
- Start date
And it’s the only way they’ll stop the bias and general incompetence against us
earl
Well-known member
I agree. The problem is though it's happened to us a couple of times this season.
earl
Well-known member
I said this is another thread and one poster said that my understanding was incorrect. It was stated that bunker looks at different views or something.
Personally I can see his hand on the ball and the ball on the ground. That is a try.
I can't believe it wasn't mentioned. Luc's try was a try as well. In both situations it appears they just don't even check.
I honestly don’t think you could tell with the available angles (to us viewers anyway). Unless the bunker saw some sort of alternate angle which confirmed it. Because it went up to them as a try.. So would need to be proven otherwise. It was seemingly dismissed too quickly, and I can’t say they made the right decision because of all the camera angles we saw, none actually confirmed that he didn’t ground it
That's the point I don't remember close try situation (sent up as try) with so few camera angles and few replays and no very slow motion .So I can't tell
Why?
twentyforty
Well-known member
This was a try.
twentyforty
Well-known member
This one was a real clanger. Rochow certainly looks to be square given his forward movement. But Kleine thought it was worth a penalty in front to give Broncos a 1 point win.
NZTiger
Well-known member
My Tuilagi TRY is getting some good traction! 😍
4jtigers
Well-known member
IF he did drop the ball - then why isn't it a penalty try? 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
twentyforty
Well-known member
I'm sure Anersley will explain that when he eventually apologises.
diedpretty
Well-known member
If thats the case the question that the bunker needed to answer was did he drop it because of the illegal tackle by Lomax.
TieDye
Well-known member
He manipulates the situation adversely for us by attempting to dislodge the ball (and plays at the attackers ball-carrying arm) rather than waiting and bracing for contact (as defenders instructed to do) via trying to wrap the ball up and/or going for a 1-on-1 strip.
There was another player involved in the tackle for mine as he hits the ground, plus, referee had already clearly ruled the contact on Kelma beginning AFTER the contest would constitute a penalty due to foul-play.
So, they either disagree with on field and call play on or Dragons ball for a knock-on… which it wasn’t, because full separation was never established, or penalty TRY.
Don’t shoot the messenger
Last edited:
InBenjiWeTrust
Well-known member
IMHO, that was established as the penalty was awarded.
It shall be a clear case: a player was in possession of the ball, and in the position to score a try when he was fouled -> a penalty try
LeichhardtTiger
Well-known member
This is what the Bunker should have said:
"Tuilagi catches the ball in the in goal area and is then taken out by Dragons Lomax in mid-air. At this point, he still has control of the ball. Checking the grounding. Tuilagi is in possession and looks to touch down. He releases his left hand which was on top of the ball but his right hand remains in contact with the ball as it contacts the in goal. We have a decision" - TRY!
TieDye
Well-known member
Refs call? Professional foul? 10 in the bin? Foul play in the act of a player scoring? Simultaneously lost as he grounds it? 8-point try? Dragons didn’t challenge refs call? The look on Kelma’s face?
Priceless…
Tiger_Fanatic3
Well-known member
