NRL Fantasy Fanatics

A forum for discussion of NRL Fantasy / Dream Team / Supercoach as well as discussions about other sports, ex Sportal.

    Round 14 Match Thread

    Share

    leaguegod

    Posts : 785
    Reputation : 67
    Join date : 2015-11-24

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by leaguegod on Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:37 pm

    So it comes down to whether you consider it a forward pass or a fumble after a pass, I think it's the latter but can see the argument for the opposite


    But either way, the bunker was 100% right and it's not that easy of a call for the on field refs to make (tho if they stopped it right away, given how it looked, I doubt anyone would have complained)

    Oz Sport Mad

    Posts : 985
    Reputation : 212
    Join date : 2015-09-28

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Oz Sport Mad on Tue Jun 14, 2016 2:09 pm

    @Pieman wrote:No, its ultimately a pass.

    He does it in the motion of passing, thats why its a forward pass. Its essentially the same thing as winding up to throw a pass and it slips out of your hands and goes forward. In this case, he's winding up the pass, it hasnt left his right hand yet, the other hand hits it, he loses it and it goes forward it then travels forward, a fair way too, then he regathers it on the other side of the defensive line and they score.

    He even reacts and tips it up - which is a deliberate tap over the line

    For mine; if he fumbles it in the motion of passing and it goes to another player, that is the delineation between a pass and a fumble/regather.

    I've even seen similar incidents when a dummy half has gone to dummy but has fumbled, half let it go and then regathered - play on as it should be.

    A deliberate tap over the player is an entirely different kettle of fish and if he did that then it would be a penalty.........but he doesn't.

    Dip

    Posts : 1123
    Reputation : 149
    Join date : 2015-09-30

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Dip on Tue Jun 14, 2016 2:27 pm

    If that is not a pass, whenever something goes to the video ref to check a try, then I never again want to hear the commentators say something like "they can't rule on a forward pass so it'll only be disallowed if they rule he lost it rather than passed it". To me that's as much of a pass as anything. He had the ball in two hands, passed it with two hand (I don't think it's arguable that he wasn't throwing a pass), and I don't think the left hand came off the ball then later hit the ball (which I guess could fall under the knock on provisions).

    There's been a zillion times when we've all gone "yeah it's gone forward but he was trying to pass it so they can't rule on that so stiff shit".

    I don't have a problem that the video ref has done the wrong thing, because as mentioned above, the video ref can't rule on a forward pass (I think that's a shit rule, but it's the rule none the less), I just don't see how they can say it was a knock on.

    Dip

    Posts : 1123
    Reputation : 149
    Join date : 2015-09-30

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Dip on Tue Jun 14, 2016 2:39 pm

    What was the on field call? I sort of get the feeling that it's a case of the refs team looking after each other. How bad would it look if after taking advice from the video ref, the on field ref had to explain to Gareth Widdop "Yeah there was no knock on, and it should have been called a forward pass since it went 3 metres forward, but I stuffed up and the video ref can't correct that".

    Lucky it was only the Dogs beating the Dragons by a couple of tries. If it happened in origin there'd be a bigger uproar than when Hayne stepped on the sideline.

    Oz Sport Mad

    Posts : 985
    Reputation : 212
    Join date : 2015-09-28

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Oz Sport Mad on Tue Jun 14, 2016 2:46 pm

    @Dip wrote:If that is not a pass, whenever something goes to the video ref to check a try, then I never again want to hear the commentators say something like "they can't rule on a forward pass so it'll only be disallowed if they rule he lost it rather than passed it". To me that's as much of a pass as anything. He had the ball in two hands, passed it with two hand (I don't think it's arguable that he wasn't throwing a pass), and I don't think the left hand came off the ball then later hit the ball (which I guess could fall under the knock on provisions).

    There's been a zillion times when we've all gone "yeah it's gone forward but he was trying to pass it so they can't rule on that so stiff shit".

    I don't have a problem that the video ref has done the wrong thing, because as mentioned above, the video ref can't rule on a forward pass (I think that's a shit rule, but it's the rule none the less), I just don't see how they can say it was a knock on.

    They didn't say it was a knock on.

    It was a fumble/regather wasn't it??

    A pass needs to be to another player (by the letter of the law) and as I said above that is the delineation point for mine, it was fumbled before it became a pass (i.e. to another player).

    The only grey area would be whether it was deliberate or not and I think that is fairly clear.

    leaguegod

    Posts : 785
    Reputation : 67
    Join date : 2015-11-24

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by leaguegod on Tue Jun 14, 2016 3:06 pm

    Archer confirms ruling was 100% correct


    Dip

    Posts : 1123
    Reputation : 149
    Join date : 2015-09-30

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Dip on Tue Jun 14, 2016 3:18 pm

    @Oz Sport Mad wrote:

    They didn't say it was a knock on.

    It was a fumble/regather wasn't it??

    A pass needs to be to another player (by the letter of the law) and as I said above that is the delineation point for mine, it was fumbled before it became a pass (i.e. to another player).

    The only grey area would be whether it was deliberate or not and I think that is fairly clear.

    You are right that by definition a pass is (straight out of the rule book):

    PASS is a throw of the ball from one player to another.

    But by the same token, when looking at the rules regarding knock on and forward passes (there is no such thing as a fumble in the rule book):

    SECTION 10
    KNOCK-ON AND FORWARD PASS
    Deliberate 1. A player shall be penalised if he deliberately knocks
    on or passes forward.
    Accidental 2. If, after knocking-on accidentally, the player
    knocking-on regains or kicks the ball before it
    touches the ground, a goal post, cross bar or an
    opponent, then play shall be allowed to proceed.
    Otherwise play shall stop and a scrum shall be
    formed except after the fifth play-the-ball.
    Charge-down 3. To charge-down a kick is permissible and is not a
    knock-on.
    Heading the ball 4. It is illegal to head the ball in a forward direction.

    Then according to that, there is no provision that the following are knock on's or forward passes:
    1. The Dally messenger rule of passing over an oponent - since you don't pass to another person; or
    2. If you drop the ball forward, it bounces off a team-mate and you regather before it hits the ground, opponent or cross bar.

    Now both of those are called, so I think it's more about interpretation of rules. The actual rule book isn't that big and doesn't cover lots of things.

    I think everyone agrees it wasn't deliberate, just unco.
    avatar
    No Worries
    Moderator

    Posts : 3058
    Reputation : 809
    Join date : 2015-07-31
    Location : Leichhardt Oval on a Sunday arvo

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by No Worries on Tue Jun 14, 2016 3:53 pm

    @leaguegod wrote:Archer confirms ruling was 100% correct


    avatar
    Pieman

    Posts : 1846
    Reputation : 149
    Join date : 2015-10-26

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Pieman on Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:04 pm

    @Dip wrote:If that is not a pass, whenever something goes to the video ref to check a try, then I never again want to hear the commentators say something like "they can't rule on a forward pass so it'll only be disallowed if they rule he lost it rather than passed it". To me that's as much of a pass as anything. He had the ball in two hands, passed it with two hand (I don't think it's arguable that he wasn't throwing a pass), and I don't think the left hand came off the ball then later hit the ball (which I guess could fall under the knock on provisions).

    There's been a zillion times when we've all gone "yeah it's gone forward but he was trying to pass it so they can't rule on that so stiff shit".

    I don't have a problem that the video ref has done the wrong thing, because as mentioned above, the video ref can't rule on a forward pass (I think that's a shit rule, but it's the rule none the less), I just don't see how they can say it was a knock on.

    They didnt say it was a knock on. They said it wasnt a knock on because it didnt hit anyone.

    It was in the motion of passing, it was a forward pass to himself over the line of the defence - its an unintentional dally messenger
    avatar
    Honeysett
    Moderator

    Posts : 4756
    Reputation : 1350
    Join date : 2015-09-28
    Location : Scarborough

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Honeysett on Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:07 pm

    @Pieman wrote:

    They didnt say it was a knock on. They said it wasnt a knock on because it didnt hit anyone.

    It was in the motion of passing, it was a forward pass to himself over the line of the defence - its an unintentional dally messenger

    Therefore it's not a deliberate forward pass and it's not a penalty. Thank you, the last horse crosses the finish line.
    avatar
    Pieman

    Posts : 1846
    Reputation : 149
    Join date : 2015-10-26

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Pieman on Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:08 pm

    and this brings me back to - just because its unintentional doesn't mean its play on - my very first comment on it. Well done!

    Oz Sport Mad

    Posts : 985
    Reputation : 212
    Join date : 2015-09-28

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Oz Sport Mad on Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:21 pm

    @Pieman wrote:and this brings me back to - just because its unintentional doesn't mean its play on - my very first comment on it. Well done!

    It actually precisely means that you utter, utter simpleton.
    avatar
    Honeysett
    Moderator

    Posts : 4756
    Reputation : 1350
    Join date : 2015-09-28
    Location : Scarborough

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Honeysett on Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:33 pm

    @Pieman wrote:and this brings me back to - just because its unintentional doesn't mean its play on - my very first comment on it. Well done!

    Yes it does. 100% what it means. That's why I couldn't understand your argument.
    avatar
    Milchcow
    Moderator

    Posts : 4972
    Reputation : 1454
    Join date : 2015-07-31

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Milchcow on Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:40 pm

    @leaguegod wrote:Archer confirms ruling was 100% correct


    This argument from the refs shits me to tears.

    Sure, if you follow the letter of the law you can say it's play on (even then that assumes the knock on isn't from the same motion of passing which I disagree with)

    But if you go that route, there should be about 100 penalties a game if we go by the letter of the law.
    Why pick that one to defend, and ignore the numerous illegal play the balls, offsides, foul play etc that every one gets away with nearly every game
    avatar
    Honeysett
    Moderator

    Posts : 4756
    Reputation : 1350
    Join date : 2015-09-28
    Location : Scarborough

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Honeysett on Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:42 pm

    @Milchcow wrote:

    This argument from the refs shits me to tears.

    Sure, if you follow the letter of the law you can say it's play on (even then that assumes the knock on isn't from the same motion of passing which I disagree with)

    But if you go that route, there should be about 100 penalties a game if we go by the letter of the law.
    Why pick that one to defend, and ignore the numerous illegal play the balls, offsides, foul play etc that every one gets away with nearly every game

    Because we want to distance ourselves from Union.

    The NRL clubs know they can get away with pushing the boundaries because the penalties eventually dry up so the refs feel they don't ruin the game
    avatar
    Milchcow
    Moderator

    Posts : 4972
    Reputation : 1454
    Join date : 2015-07-31

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Milchcow on Tue Jun 14, 2016 6:02 pm

    @Honeysett wrote:

    Because we want to distance ourselves from Union.

    We want to distance ourselves from union by allowing Tony Williams to profit from his error?

    Oz Sport Mad

    Posts : 985
    Reputation : 212
    Join date : 2015-09-28

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Oz Sport Mad on Tue Jun 14, 2016 6:10 pm

    @Dip wrote:

    You are right that by definition a pass is (straight out of the rule book):

    PASS is a throw of the ball from one player to another.

    But by the same token, when looking at the rules regarding knock on and forward passes (there is no such thing as a fumble in the rule book):

    SECTION 10
    KNOCK-ON AND FORWARD PASS
    Deliberate 1. A player shall be penalised if he deliberately knocks
    on or passes forward.
    Accidental 2. If, after knocking-on accidentally, the player
    knocking-on regains or kicks the ball before it
    touches the ground, a goal post, cross bar or an
    opponent, then play shall be allowed to proceed.
    Otherwise play shall stop and a scrum shall be
    formed except after the fifth play-the-ball.
    Charge-down 3. To charge-down a kick is permissible and is not a
    knock-on.
    Heading the ball 4. It is illegal to head the ball in a forward direction.

    Then according to that, there is no provision that the following are knock on's or forward passes:
    1. The Dally messenger rule of passing over an oponent - since you don't pass to another person; or
    2. If you drop the ball forward, it bounces off a team-mate and you regather before it hits the ground, opponent or cross bar.

    Now both of those are called, so I think it's more about interpretation of rules. The actual rule book isn't that big and doesn't cover lots of things.

    I think everyone agrees it wasn't deliberate, just unco.

    Dip, in terms of your first point, I reckon the Dally messenger rule might be covered under Point 1 i.e. a deliberate knock on.

    A deliberate forward pass on the other hand is clarified as:

    If the Referee is of the opinion that a player in giving a forward pass must have been well aware that the catcher was in front of him then the referee is justified in ruling that the ball has been deliberately thrown forward.

    In terms of your second point, I reckon that would be deemed a pass rather than a knock on because it went to another player.
    avatar
    Honeysett
    Moderator

    Posts : 4756
    Reputation : 1350
    Join date : 2015-09-28
    Location : Scarborough

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Honeysett on Tue Jun 14, 2016 6:12 pm

    @Milchcow wrote:

    We want to distance ourselves from union by allowing Tony Williams to profit from his error?

    I was referring to not calling penalties every single time
    avatar
    Pieman

    Posts : 1846
    Reputation : 149
    Join date : 2015-10-26

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by Pieman on Wed Jun 15, 2016 10:46 am

    @Honeysett wrote:

    Yes it does. 100% what it means. That's why I couldn't understand your argument.

    The act of passing makes it a pass - an intentional thing - which he fucked up and turned into a forward pass over the defensive line which he got an advantage of, even if he didnt mean to. Which is why It should have been a turnover.

    Just like, when a player goes in to tackle someone and they slip and make a head high tackle. Its not "play on, it was unintentional".
    Or if someone unintentionally kicks it out on the full, its not oh he didnt mean to, play on.


    leaguegod

    Posts : 785
    Reputation : 67
    Join date : 2015-11-24

    Re: Round 14 Match Thread

    Post by leaguegod on Wed Jun 15, 2016 11:15 am

    @Milchcow wrote:

    This  argument from the refs shits me to tears.

    Sure,  if you follow the letter of the law you can say it's play on (even then that assumes the knock on isn't from the same motion of passing which I disagree with)

    But if you go that route,  there should be about 100 penalties a game if we go by the letter of the law.
    Why pick that one to defend,  and ignore the numerous illegal play the balls,  offsides,  foul play etc that every one gets away with nearly every game


    i personally think the bunker had to rule the way they did



    as i said earlier, if the on field refs just call knock on right away, not a single soul would have really cared because of how it looked, game would have gone on and we likely wouldn't even seen many replays but i do think once it got to the bunker, green lights were the only option

      Current date/time is Sun Jul 23, 2017 10:36 am