Before somebody else brings it up..

[Tiger_heart]

in AFL they call it push in the back…in league, benefit of the doubt 😕

 

[system]

Bloody shocking decision.

 

[Tiger_heart]

It cost us the match - not taking anything away from the overall substandard performance we put in, though..

 

[king_sirro]

I understand that when Ryan went for the ball he was fair game, but only to an extent. I thought it was clear that he didnt have the ball when he was taken out. I believe he would have grounded the ball in goal if Minichiello didnt illegally tackle him,

 

[Danos]

I'm fine with it. Minichiello was going full speed, would've been hard for him to make any less contact.

 

[Chunk]

I thought it was a fair try

 

[Tiger_heart]

I'm fine with it. Minichiello was going full speed, would've been hard for him to make any less contact.

Don't refes give a penalty if you charge a kicker afther he has kicked the ball, even when you are running at full speed??

 

[Tiger_Watto]

It was just part of the contest. Fair Try!

 

[tomcat]

fair try boys..

 

[westTAHger]

no excuses. :unamused:
roosters created an opportunity and made most of it. :blush:
we would be estatic if it was other way around. :wahoo:

 

[Bismark]

I'm fine with it. Minichiello was going full speed, would've been hard for him to make any less contact.

Don't refes give a penalty if you charge a kicker afther he has kicked the ball, even when you are running at full speed??

Thats a totally different rule. It's like complaining about not getting a raking call on halfway and bringing up the fact that it can legally happen in the in-goal.

 

[stryker]

I'm fine with it. Minichiello was going full speed, would've been hard for him to make any less contact.

Agreed, the benefit of the doubt was for whether Mini believed Beau had the ball and therefore had to make the tackle.

It was all part of the contest….fair try.

 

[Marshall_magic]

Fair try I thought.

 

[TimmyB]

Irrelevant whether Miniciello thought Ryan had the ball or not. Even if Miniciello couldn't have pulled out, the fact remains that there was a definite gap between the loss of possession and contact and Ryan was definitely deprived of the opportunity to regather the ball.

Definite penalty in my opinion and a shocking decision. Watched the game with an avid Roosters' follower who agreed.

 

[fergiefurr]

fair try

 

[tigh]

A player was taken out when not in possession of the ball. Penalty Tigers.

However, we should well and truley have won the game by then with all the attacking chances we had. We were our own worst enemy. We did not deserve to win.

It is these close, grinding matches we must win if we hope to have any chance of making the 8.

 

[Benson]

I'm fine with it. Minichiello was going full speed, would've been hard for him to make any less contact.

Don't refes give a penalty if you charge a kicker afther he has kicked the ball, even when you are running at full speed??

It reminds me of when Gibbs got penalised in the in goal area accidently kicking a player in the head. He to could not change direction however we lost big time on that one.

 

[alex]

Shocking decision. If Matt Cooper got a penalty try last week for that little bump 15m away from the ball, today's effort deserved to go in our favour.

 

[ron_burgandy]

same verse the dogs when turner tackled marshall without the ball, so they are consistant atleast, however i believe both should of been penalties

 

[NJLM78]

same verse the dogs when turner tackled marshall without the ball, so they are consistant atleast, however i believe both should of been penalties

Thats right. You cannot interfere with a player to an extent that it prevents him from being involved in the play. Accidental or not, Beau Ryan was unable to compete for the ball due to the actions of another player. Strange decision. The 'doubt' can only be that the video referee doubted that Beau would have got to the ball first.