i was at the game (sitting in front of the family hill so no decent view of the big screen)& couldn't figure out why the manly try in the second half was dis-allowed. also what was the ensuing penalty for?
mmmdl said:What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?
mmmdl said:What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?
Stevo said:mmmdl said:What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?
Because a penalty over rules an error. :rules:
Shoe1 said:mmmdl said:What I don't understand about that particular play was that the refs had called 6 again, and to check the try. If it's no try, and the Roosters knocked the ball on, why doesn't it come back to the first infringement?
True why not?
Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 | 4 | 1 | 23 | 10 | |
5 | 4 | 1 | 14 | 10 | |
6 | 4 | 2 | 48 | 8 | |
6 | 4 | 2 | 28 | 8 | |
5 | 3 | 2 | 25 | 8 | |
5 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 8 | |
6 | 3 | 2 | 38 | 7 | |
6 | 3 | 2 | 21 | 7 | |
6 | 3 | 3 | 37 | 6 | |
6 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 6 | |
6 | 3 | 3 | -13 | 6 | |
5 | 2 | 3 | -15 | 6 | |
6 | 3 | 3 | -36 | 6 | |
6 | 2 | 4 | -5 | 4 | |
6 | 2 | 4 | -7 | 4 | |
5 | 0 | 5 | -86 | 2 | |
6 | 1 | 5 | -102 | 2 |