Pearce Try....Obstruction?

weststigers

Well-known member
Just interested to hear how people on here saw the Pearce try where there was a hint of obstruction…It was pretty blatant in my opinion, what do you all think?

(Not that it would have changed much!)
 
I think the try. I'm not sure by which rooster, that had a forward pass and a blatant obstruction which stopped two of our players and was given a try was worse. We deserved to lose that game , we didn't play well but the refereeing is ridiculous , especially after at least 10 looks at it
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
 
Yep. Mini took out 2 Tigers and Pearce scored…horrendous.

@GNR4LIFE - No it doesn't matter in light of our game and I stated that in my OP. I do, however think it matters that the officials know the rules when they are refereeing matches; Tigers games or otherwise.
 
Yeh, Utai was obstructed, that said….players cannot disappear either....it was a tricky one, but according to the rules, a player was run behind, he gained an advantage.....and for some bizaare reason it was BOTD....they just make it up as they go along
 
Realy doesnt matter in the context of this game, however it is yet another example of how confusing this rule has become. It was an obstruction. I dont understand why it was given.
 
No try how these clowns come up with these decisions makes mee wonder how the hell can they come up with stupid decisions again and again they looked it umpteen times as well
 
The only time we will see a penalty for obstruction is next Sat night if the Wests Tigers run one.
 
I thought it was funny that he sent out that video explaining what an obstruction was, and then that same try was given the next weekend.

Wouldn't have changed the result at all, but still stupid.
 
Blatant obstruction in my opinion - Mini got between Utai and the ball carrier - you can't do it.

That said - it would have made bugger all difference to the result.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
 
Forget the obstruction, what about the forward pass from Pearce just before the obstruction this. Oh that's right, we can not rule on that…
 
We always seem to attract questionable refereeing :frowning:. The two obstruction calls were ridiculous, and unfortunately means teams will try this a lot more if they can keep getting away with it. Which is a problem because it is so hard to defend against.

Has the rule on obstructions changed or something? because surely it's against the rules still?
 
Not that it mattered but Stuart Raper has come out and admitted that the Pearce try "could have been ruled obstruction and disallowed". Still can't get it right…
\
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
 
It would not have made a difference in the overall result. But as Sheens mentioned in the press conference its 6 points against us that may or may not make a difference at the end of the season.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
 
Melbourne were denied a try against Cronulla in tonight's game for an obstruction. Just goes to show you, they can get it right if they try hard enough.
Poor video ref must a been shitting himself. "what do I do, I forgot to watch Bill's new masterclass video. Bugger it, I'll close my eyes and hope for the best"
 
Im glad the game wasn't closer, because i was certain it was an obstruction.

3 times this year we have had tries scored with seemingly obvious obstructions missed and all were conceded on the monday, the only important one was in the Doggies game, but still, frustrating.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top