Every week, a new interpretation

[Tiger_heart]

tonight's feature: Obstruction…what a call :crazy

 

[weststigers4life]

Still shaking my head how they awarded the try to Walsh, if the video ref isn't dropped they need to sack Harrigan.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[Tiger_heart]

Bill is probably thinking about what to say now…

 

[saundo1982]

It shouldn't have been a try, but Timmy should have kept running towards Walsh. Had ended up 1m away as opposed to 4m could have put a different spin on things.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[galea_11]

i thought it should of been try if the tigers player didnt slip over would we care if moltzen was tapped ?

 

[bundyboy]

The video ref must have still been in origin mode ! What a joke
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[MacDougall]

Moltzen should have still attempted the friggin tackle but you're right it was a dud call.

I get the feeling that the video ref didn't even look at Moltzen and was just looking at BMM falling over his shadow. I really think that the video ref should have the commentators in his ear when adjudicating just in case he fails to see certain things.

 

[Tiger_heart]

Commentators advising refs? That's stretching it…

 

[MacDougall]

Not advising. Just the audio stream of the broadcast playing in the box just in case he misses something obvious. I am pretty sure he didn't even look at Moltzen because blind Freddy would have called that a no try.

 

[hellman]

That try was a terrible decision.

 

[TIGER]

Take the blinkers off it was a try, no Tigers player was obstructed they slipped over without any help.

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Beautiful dummy by Walsh though.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[innsaneink]

Moltzen in his true colours,…..decides its preferable to stop playing & have a whinge rather than give it everything

Not a first graders ringoll

 

[mitch2040]

I agree ink, I can't wait till moltz is a utility.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[happy_tiger]

Moltzen should have still attempted the friggin tackle but you're right it was a dud call.

I get the feeling that the video ref didn't even look at Moltzen and was just looking at BMM falling over his shadow. I really think that the video ref should have the commentators in his ear when adjudicating just in case he fails to see certain things.

Yeah agree I think they thought Moltzen was playing for the penalty

At least if Moltzen tries to attempt to make the tackle we would of got the penalty

 

[system]

I think if Tim continues and attempts a tackle it is a no try call.

One of those things though. it is all a lottery this season

 

[TIGER]

I agree i hate how players appeal to the ref instead of playing on then asking the question but imo Moltzen wouldn't of got near the try scorer anyway.

 

[underdog]

Definate no try - Moltzen gets Barged into to in goal!!! The video ref was looking at the wrong part of the scene, as Woods slipping over did provide a fairly decent distraction.

 

[Frank_the_tank]

I don't care if it was called try or no try, as long as the rule is CONSISTANT and the same for every team week in week out and the same rule is applied the same way by all the refs.

 

[Anthism]

Robbie did the same thing in origin why are you singling out Moltzen? Clearly must hate him no matter what. I thought He had a better case than Robbie too.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_