Disallowed try

[sean1976]

If the second souths try was legit, so was the Symonds try. The difference was that the ref thought the Souths try was legit and that the Manly try wasnt - and that pretty much forced the hand of the video ref. The new system gives a lot of weight to the Refs decision, even in cases where he may have had a poor read of the play.

I prefer the old rule where the video ref decides and the Ref doesn't give an opinion, unless asked by the video ref. At least then you get consistent decisions.

The Symonds try was massive - 14-6 with approx 30 minutes to go would have made it a sensational finish.

The game felt to me a lot like the Dogs game at brookie last year. We seemed overly hyped and edgy. You just sensed early on that things weren't going to go our way.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Yep, your right with all of that.

I really hoped noone was going to bring it up.

 

[simon64]

Yep, your right with all of that.

I really hoped noone was going to bring it up.

Agreed. Especially the last paragraph.

 

[Chip and Chase]

I think the Souths try was OK and I also don't have a problem with Symonds' try being disallowed. If you run behind your own players you lose benefit of the doubt.

I like the new rule where the ref makes a decision and the video ref has to change his mind. Much better IMO, the old system was pathetic and we had many more shockers than we have had lately.

You are right on one thing, we do sweat up in the mounting yard a bit in the big games.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

I think the Souths try was OK and I also don't have a problem with Symonds' try being disallowed. If you run behind your own players you lose benefit of the doubt.

I like the new rule where the ref makes a decision and the video ref has to change his mind. Much better IMO, the old system was pathetic and we had many more shockers than we have had lately.

You are right on one thing, we do sweat up in the mounting yard a bit in the big games.

Im with you on the ref/video ref decision making heirachy.

Are you sure Symonds ran behind ?Ballin?

 

[sean1976]

I think the Souths try was OK and I also don't have a problem with Symonds' try being disallowed. If you run behind your own players you lose benefit of the doubt.

I like the new rule where the ref makes a decision and the video ref has to change his mind. Much better IMO, the old system was pathetic and we had many more shockers than we have had lately.

You are right on one thing, we do sweat up in the mounting yard a bit in the big games.

If a decoy runner makes contact and impedes however briefly the line of a defender you also should lose benefit of the doubt. Look at the Souths try in normal time and you can see that Ballin is impeded.

THe problem with the old system was more with the rules that the video ref were made to follow - particularly with decoy runners and players grounding the ball. They've been largely rectified. For what its worth, I'm just pointing to what looks like a problem with consistency inherent to the new system.

 

[joeboy]

HI didn't ave a major problem with the Sutton try, but I did think the rule was decoys had to run through the defensive line, he made contact and then stood in our line.

The Symonds no try was a joke. Ballin was dummy half on that play, didn't move, and poor old lazy, washed up Asotasi just didn't try and make the tackle,

As the commentators said, Roy was hooked straight after it.

Shocking call, hopefully that's one of ours out of the way for this year.

 

[voicefromthehill]

I think the Souths try was OK and I also don't have a problem with Symonds' try being disallowed. If you run behind your own players you lose benefit of the doubt.

I like the new rule where the ref makes a decision and the video ref has to change his mind. Much better IMO, the old system was pathetic and we had many more shockers than we have had lately.

You are right on one thing, we do sweat up in the mounting yard a bit in the big games.

Im with you on the ref/video ref decision making heirachy.

Are you sure Symonds ran behind ?Ballin?

At the ground I thought he did - but there appeared to be a Souffs player between them - that is not impeded.

And speaking of sweating up in the mounting yard, geeze Gifty looks like he was out in the back paddock for a while, he has some condition on him

 

[joeboy]

Gifty has looked a bit heavy for about three years I reckon, lost pace as a result and his running game isn't anywhere near what it was.. Hopefully Donny gets into him.

 

[Masked Eagle]

I thought it was going to be disallowed, the difference was Asotasi never tried to tackle Ballin, whereas Ballin made a move to tackle his opponent. That being said, they showed one angle of the no try after they made the decision and it looked like it was from somewhere near the corner post. They only showed it once, but it looked like me there was clear seperation between Asotasi and Ballin and Roy never had to deviate to get to him. From the other angles it looked a lot closer, but as I said they only showed that once. I would like to see it again, but to be honest, I think I'll give it a miss!

 

[Chip and Chase]

Symonds ran from somewhere out right back across the goal posts, Ballin wasn't the only one he ran behind there was another Manly player there as well.

Suttons try was just a bad read by Ballin, the decoy went through just before the ball was passed behind him and the pass went wide enough for Ballin to read better I thought. Try came more from Richies miss than any interference on Ballin.

 

[manlyfan76]

Asotasi could have tried to tackle Big Red as he ran past him and did nothing of the sort. Try everytime for me.

 

[Technical Coach]

A good decoy should draw in a defender and in many instances contact will be made, it is the ultimate role of a decoy the best outcome and a reward for running a good hard believable well structured line. If the attacker/decoy is 1-2m away from the defender being dragged in the defender has to prepare to make a tackle or risk being busted through and falling off if he waits to prepare when the hole runner catches the ball.

Ballin made a decision the try is fine, Symonds non try to me can go either way so i'm fine with the decision. Yeah the defender probably milked the decision but running behind your own player in such a way is poor attack and should not be rewarded or encouraged--- in the same way i feel that Origin try from QLD should have been disallowed.(The Hodges one i think)

A previous post in this thread mentioned "losing benefit of the doubt" running behind your own player i fully agree with.

 

[Rex]

Both tries could very easily have gone the other way.

1. Ballin put himself in the position to tackle the runner if he got the ball, but didn't attempt to tackle him. The decoy ran into Ballin. Without the collision, Ballin would have been in position to tackle Sutton. The decoy intended to take out Ballin and did. We'll see more of this move this year.
To my mind there is a clear difference between putting yourself in a position to tackle a decoy runner and actually tackling him. But not according to the refs apparently.

2. Asotasi played for the sheppard call. The try should have been allowed solely because of the poor acting job Asotasi did. IMO Ballin was side-by-side with Asotasi, not in front of him. Lazy work also by Ballin in not taking a single step towards the tryline to remove the possibility of a penalty.

1 decision each way would have probably been a fair result - they were pretty equivalent - but sometimes the calls all go against you. Usually not on your home ground though.

 

[danny-boy]

Did the ref rule a try before going up? If so that means the video ref over ruled him because of conclusive evidence. That bothers me because the angle they showed didnt show conclusive evidence. The angle they showed after the decision clearly showed there was no contact or obstruction.

 

[Pittwater Legend]

Did the ref rule a try before going up? If so that means the video ref over ruled him because of conclusive evidence. That bothers me because the angle they showed didnt show conclusive evidence. The angle they showed after the decision clearly showed there was no contact or obstruction.

Unfortunately the ref ruled no try on Symonds before referring it.

 

[danny-boy]

Did the ref rule a try before going up? If so that means the video ref over ruled him because of conclusive evidence. That bothers me because the angle they showed didnt show conclusive evidence. The angle they showed after the decision clearly showed there was no contact or obstruction.

Unfortunately the ref ruled no try on Symonds before referring it.

Doh. Thanks.

 

[silvertail]

Ballin was knocked back and off balance by the decoy runner, lost a second and a bit out of the defensive line and was only slightly late covering the inside step by Sutton. NO TRY if I was referred.

At no stage is Asotosi touched of impeded by Ballin. FAIR TRY.

Williams slams the ball down after regaining separation by jarring ball into his knee. FAIR TRY.

 

[Dan]

Asotasi could have ran forward to tackle symonds but instead waited back so he could run into ballin

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

I have no doubt in my mind that if the Symonds try is awarded we go on to win