FORUMS > The Virtual Terrace > Top Quality Decision |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1923 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2019 | Jan 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: morleys_deckchair "he wasn't touching the ball down though was he?
he hadn't even reached out to put the ball down at the time of impact.... he was just falling towards the try line... the ball was more than a few feet away from the line.'"
I beg to differ.
To reiterate what I previously said and to answer your claim, not only was Tomkins fouled [iat the line[/i, he was reaching out and the ball was grounded 0.24 seconds later. How ridiculous would it be to have a rule that specifically would only award a penalty if Tomkins had been punched 0.24 seconds later at the moment the ball touched the floor, not a millisecond earlier or later. Let's face it, if you were right the RFL would have used the word "touched" rather than "touching".
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1923 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2019 | Jan 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: morleys_deckchair "it wasn't being scored though... that's why is WASNT given.'"
Of course it was. 0.24 seconds later it had been scored, therefore at the point of reaching forward at the line it was being scored. A try cannot be "being scored" and "have been scored" at the same time. If the RFL meant "been scored" they would surely say so.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 9680 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2009 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: TheElectricGlidingWarrior "snip.'"
so in this seasons world championship game .... what did you think when Morris scored in the corner and tomkins came in and smashed his knees into morris after he had grounded the ball?
bearing in mind he had already got the ball down when the foul was commited?
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 20628 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2016 | Aug 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: morleys_deckchair "just read the wigan board..... that should clear up any doubts you have.
i think raynor is being hung tomorrow outside primark.'"
Now i'm even more confused because on every other board he's getting a knighthood
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1923 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2019 | Jan 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: morleys_deckchair "so in this seasons world championship game .... what did you think when Morris scored in the corner and tomkins came in and smashed his knees into morris after he had grounded the ball?
bearing in mind he had already got the ball down when the foul was commited?'"
Maybe if you start a thread on it there'll be some discussion and I might just grace it with my opinion. For now, however, I shall assume you are changing the subject in lieu of an adequate rebuttal. Good night.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 9680 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2009 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| there was a thread on it when it happened and you wigan fans cried 'there was nothing wrong with it... he was trying to stop someone scoring a try'
and now a foul has happened against you its a totally different ball game.
at the end of the day its rugby karma... rat boy has been cheating and dishing out cheap shots since the day he walked into SL... now someone has knocked him out by accident and you are all up in arms.
get a grip lad.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 20628 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2016 | Aug 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| What that picture shows is he's about 3-4 feet from the line
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 9680 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2009 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Horatio Yed "What that picture shows is he's about 3-4 feet from the line'"
the ball could easily have come out of his hands......
i dont know what all the fuss is about.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 14970 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2002 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2021 | Nov 2021 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Horatio Yed "What that picture shows is he's about 3-4 feet from the line'"
On what planet is that 3-4 foot? Its about 2 foot high and nearly above the line. Tomkins was reaching out to put the ball down when contact was made. In my view that classifies as an 8 point try.
Quote: Horatio Yed "
the ball could easily have come out of his hands......
i dont know what all the fuss is about. '"
But the ball didn't come out of his hands. He scored. And was fouled whilst in the act of scoring.
The fuss is about the proper application of the rules or the differing interpretations of the rules by referees. Also it's about the fact Wigan should have had 2 more points in a very close game.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 9680 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2009 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| no one cares
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 20628 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2016 | Aug 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| look at the size of the players feet, imagine them 3-4 in line all after each other, about 3-4 feet.
Half a body length, which is about right.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 5064 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2002 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2017 | Feb 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Horatio Yed "Now i am confused.
Is there some way of looking at the official rules (link).'"
It is pretty clear that this refers to when the ball is actually being grounded. Not when the ball is a couple of feet off the ground prior to it being touched down. This is also consistent with how rare 8 point tries are.
Ganson had a simple choice between awarding the penalty or playing the advantage and awarding the try. I think awarding the try was to Wigan's advantage.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: On Sunday May 22 Ferocious Aardvark "Raynor very clearly intended to hit the ball carrying arm, Tomkins started to go down as Raynor swung, and he ended up hitting his head. If the contact had been with the ball or the carrying arm he would have saved a try. Whereas he could have no imaginable reason to punch Tomkins in the head.
Of course his bloody fist was clenched, he was swinging it to hit the ball/arm, it's not pat-a-bleedin-cake! Why on earth would he try to hit the head, and not the ball/arm? It would make no sense.
The decision to send off was correct, as it was a risky effort, and you pay the consequences for the results of your actions. Say what you want, but for me
a) correct decision
b) no intent, but did make contact with the head
c) a reckless challenge
d) 2 game ban'"
As I was saying . . .
Mind you an appeal may be worthwhile as the time of sending off makes it effectively a 2 1/2 match ban.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1923 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2019 | Jan 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: SBR "www.therfl.co.uk/a_guide_to_the_game/official_laws/13_penalty_kick
It is pretty clear that this refers to when the ball is actually being grounded. Not when the ball is a couple of feet off the ground prior to it being touched down. This is also consistent with how rare 8 point tries are.'"
If the law required the ball to have been grounded then it would state "grounded". Ground ing is, by its very definition, the process leading to ground ed. A player at the line, reaching out with the ball so that it is 2 feet from the floor and scoring 0.24 seconds later is, by any account, in the process of grounding the ball. The process has begun, there is no denying that.
Quote: SBR "Ganson had a simple choice between awarding the penalty or playing the advantage and awarding the try. I think awarding the try was to Wigan's advantage.'"
But you seem to be saying that if the strike had occurred 0.24 seconds later when the ball had touched the ground it would have warranted a penalty kick after the conversion. Does it really stand to reason that the RFL would create a rule by which players guilty of transgressions made during the act of scoring were still punished and players offended during the act of scoring were still recompensed yet it would not apply in a situation where a player is diving over the line to score? The intention of the law can be taken from it's nameOffence against try scorer. It is meant to provide an advantage to the try scoring team when an offence has been committed.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: TheElectricGlidingWarrior "If the law required the ball to have been grounded then it would state "grounded". Grounding is, by its very definition, the process leading to grounded. A player at the line, reaching out with the ball so that it is 2 feet from the floor and scoring 0.24 seconds later is, by any account, in the process of grounding the ball. The process has begun, there is no denying that.
But you seem to be saying that if the strike had occurred 0.24 seconds later when the ball had touched the ground it would have warranted a penalty kick after the conversion. Does it really stand to reason that the RFL would create a rule by which players guilty of transgressions made during the act of scoring were still punished and players offended during the act of scoring were still recompensed yet it would not apply in a situation where a player is diving over the line to score? The intention of the law can be taken from it's nameOffence against try scorer.'"
You are talking rubbish. You do not know better than the professional referees concerned. They were right. You are wrong. You can argue that the law [ishould[/i be changed to apply to that situation, but as it stands, it does not.
In any case, using your own logic, "offence against try scorer" simply does not apply. If you speak English and are not mad, then answer me this: At the moment of impact, was Tomkins, de facto, a try scorer? No, he was not. Therefore, Raynor couldn't have committed an offence against a try scorer. It does not say "Offence against try scorer, or someone who will shortly score a try but has not done so yet."
I would be surprised if you have image rights to put up a screen grab but whilst it stays up, your image is redundant to your argument since it is taken well AFTER the contact with the head was made.This is obvious, because the head has moved all the way to Tomkins' left. You should have used a screen grab from the moment of impact, and not some point later.
|
|
|
|
|
|