That last try was not a try

[cnx_tigers]

No try, Moltzen was touching Inu when the ball was grounded short of the line affecting the tackle.

There was no hand on the body mate.

It was a try.

 

[Tiger_Watto]

Hmmmm…. I'll go NO TRY. Inu had sucummed to the Tackle

But if you claimed Benji's try last week on a technicality, technically Inu wasnt held!

 

[1_4_chicken_chips]

Watch Inus reaction, he didnt think he scored first reaction.how can you ground the ball short and then have another go .We lost it with our bench ,simple as that .Its a TRY cause its in the record books .
If we were real contenders we should have beaten a pretty ordinary side like the Warriors .Good luck to them they wanted it more than we wanted it in the end

 

[Paris_Cobbs]

I agree, it wasn't a try. The ball was grounded by Inu and Moltzen short of the line. The ball is dead, the ruling should have been a double movement penalty to us, but they seem to have scrapped that rule lately.

It was always going to be referees that knocked us out, like they did last year. The difference in the second half was the refs playing 'catch-up' to even out the penalty count a bit. The Warriors scored their tries (2 from forward passes in the lead up) from short range on the back of penalties.

This way it increases the chance of the Broncos sending Lockyer out with a premiership.

 

[Demonborger]

We should never of been in the position, even if it wasn't technically a try, we looked beaten.

 

[MacDougall]

It's funny how i disagree with literally everyone in this thread.

If the referee shuts his mouth I agree that it's a try. The reason it's not one, is because he blew time off before Inu grounds it.

 

[gazza]

Must have been a try,points are on the board and thats all that matters
cheers

 

[Digeze]

I can understand your frustration Mac. I haven't been able to go back and watch it again but yes, if the ref blew the whiste before Inu made his second attempt then that effectively is the end of the play. You can't score a try after the ref has already acknowledged a deadball situation and called time off. Obviously nothing is going to change and the 2nd half performnce doesn't deserve a win but i will be interested to watch the replay and look for that.

 

[WestsSupporter]

Was Harrigan reffing cause it didn't look like the whistle should be blown.

 

[happy_tiger]

Watch Inus reaction, he didnt think he scored first reaction.how can you ground the ball short and then have another go .We lost it with our bench ,simple as that .Its a TRY cause its in the record books .
If we were real contenders we should have beaten a pretty ordinary side like the Warriors .Good luck to them they wanted it more than we wanted it in the end

You can't deny that the refereeing was shocking tonight
The best side doesn't always win
I agree it is ancient history now but we need to stop the bad refereeing from continually screwing up the game

 

[1_4_chicken_chips]

It will never happen,and once the new tv deal goes through it will get worse,thats a fact of life.
I was watching the game with my family and when the penalties got to 4 - 0 i told them i was worried .The refs alway try to square up the ledger.After thinking about the game losing Gibbsy didnt do our cause much good .

 

[Montague_Street]

No try.
Double movement.
Should have been a penalty to the Tigers.
The "try" occurred right in front of the Warriors supporters bay. They were so quiet when it went to the video ref because they, like every one else watching on the eastern side of the SFS, saw it was a double movement
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

 

[derailed]

Was clearly a try. I thought it was at the ground watched it again at home. TRY for all money. The real issue is why were they there in the first place stupid play by as. There first three trys were also very soft. There are a lot of reasons we lost but the ruling of that try was not one of them

 

[innsaneink]

It's funny how i disagree with literally everyone in this thread.

If the referee shuts his mouth I agree that it's a try. The reason it's not one, is because he blew time off before Inu grounds it.

I looked at that try and thats all ive looked at on replay since we got home.
I looked again after this thread…..watched it about 6 times.

You can only tell from the high shot, they cut away to the low shot at a crucial moment....its touch and go and i see your point but I cant see it definately on my 103cm screen

We used up the last of our luck tonite, weve had lots go our way...LOTS

Paris Cobbs: You need to read the double movement rule you dont understand it clearly

Montague: It was on the other side of the field to the warriors bays.

 

[Montague_Street]

Yes but it was on the northern try line which was in front of them as opposed to Bay 31
\
\
Posted using RoarFEED

 

[innsaneink]

Southern tryline

Are you Pissed?

 

[philgood]

Didnt the warriors player knock it on in the first place when jumping for the ball?

 

[alexaki]

Just watched the reply….that was a fair Try...Moltzen didn't have a hand on him...if he did it would've been a no try...

 

[Paris_Cobbs]

Ink 'Paris Cobbs: You need to read the double movement rule you don't understand it clearly.'

I get it - if the ball is dead, then you can't commit a double movement after the ball is dead, which it was.

Still isn't a try.

 

[innsaneink]

Ink 'Paris Cobbs: You need to read the double movement rule you don't understand it clearly.'

I get it - if the ball is dead, then you can't commit a double movement after the ball is dead, **which it was**.

Still isn't a try.

It wasnt dead, coz he "wasnt tackled"