FORUMS FORUMS



  
FORUMS > The Virtual Terrace > Steve Ganson
92 posts in 7 pages 
<<   PREV  NEXT   >>
Subscribe | Moderators: Admin, Durham Giant , TimperleySaint
SBR
RankPostsTeam
International Board Member5064
JoinedServiceReputation
Aug 200222 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Sep 2017Feb 2016LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: Ferocious Aardvark "Which rules are those?'"


Quote: Ferocious Aardvark "The Referee should not disallow a try because he was not in a position to see the grounding of the ball.'"


This seems reasonable and I see no reason why it shouldn't apply to the Video Ref.

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach22777
JoinedServiceReputation
May 200619 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jun 2020Feb 2018LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: BlackNwhite "whats to say the tip of the ball didnt hit the ground? we couldnt see in the frames available?'"


no one, but surely benefit of doubt only becomes an issue if Ganson is split 50/50 as to which way to go.

if he is 99% sure he didnt ground it then he cant give the try on the basis something somewhere he cant even see may have happened. means its a try, it would mean the VR could do nothing but give a try, there would be no point in even asking him.

If Ganson thought it didnt touch the ground its no try, regardless of if he isnt sure 100% his opinion is the right one. If Ganson truly believed there was enough doubt in those views to cloud his judgement to the level of giving the benefit of doubt he isnt fit to referee. There is no technical get out clause here, he doesnt need to prove conclusively the other way, he just needs to give his opinion.

It was a poor decision that he should be embarrassed about, and that Cummins should bring him up for. Though we all know that isnt really likely to happen

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach22777
JoinedServiceReputation
May 200619 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jun 2020Feb 2018LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: SBR "This seems reasonable and I see no reason why it shouldn't apply to the Video Ref.'"

that doesnt say he should give it he didnt see it being grounded, or that he should give it if he doesnt see whether it was grounded or not, simply that on its own, not being able to see the ball being grounded isnt a reason not to give a try.

if the referee doesnt know he has no option but to make his best guess, similarly the video referee if he doesnt know should make his best guess, if he is split either way he can give the benefit of doubt to the attacking side.

If Ganson really was split he is a bloody idiot

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach2391
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 200519 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Oct 2020Jun 2019LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: SmokeyTA "no one, but surely benefit of doubt only becomes an issue if Ganson is split 50/50 as to which way to go.

if he is 99% sure he didnt ground it then he cant give the try on the basis something somewhere he cant even see may have happened. means its a try, it would mean the VR could do nothing but give a try, there would be no point in even asking him.

If Ganson thought it didnt touch the ground its no try, regardless of if he isnt sure 100% his opinion is the right one. If Ganson truly believed there was enough doubt in those views to cloud his judgement to the level of giving the benefit of doubt he isnt fit to referee. There is no technical get out clause here, he doesnt need to prove conclusively the other way, he just needs to give his opinion.

It was a poor decision that he should be embarrassed about, and that Cummins should bring him up for. Though we all know that isnt really likely to happen'"

thats the thing, its not his opinion or view on it, theres a rule and he made the correct call icon_smile.gif altho i agree it wasnt a try!!!!

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach22777
JoinedServiceReputation
May 200619 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jun 2020Feb 2018LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: BlackNwhite "thats the thing, its not his opinion or view on it, theres a rule and he made the correct call there isnt a rule, for there to be so would make the VR pointless. To say he has to have conclusive evidence before he can rule no try is nonsense, it would mean he would have to give nearly every decision as a try as there will always be doubt either way.

there isnt a benefit of doubt on something he doesnt think is a try, either he cant tell either way in which case the benefit of doubt is given or he he thinks it is or isnt a try.

He cant judge that he doesnt think its a try and then give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side, he is then deliberately giving a decision he thinks is incorrect.

id also ask what evidence he is expected to produce to back himself up, surely he would just show the video and say in my opinion he didnt get it down. What other evidence can he possibly give?

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach2391
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 200519 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Oct 2020Jun 2019LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: SmokeyTA "there isnt a rule, for there to be so would make the VR pointless. To say he has to have conclusive evidence before he can rule no try is nonsense, it would mean he would have to give nearly every decision as a try as there will always be doubt either way.

there isnt a benefit of doubt on something he doesnt think is a try, either he cant tell either way in which case the benefit of doubt is given or he he thinks it is or isnt a try.

He cant judge that he doesnt think its a try and then give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side, he is then deliberately giving a decision he thinks is incorrect.

id also ask what evidence he is expected to produce to back himself up, surely he would just show the video and say in my opinion he didnt get it down. What other evidence can he possibly give?'"
im not sure, this is where the BOTD rule is a bit silly. Luckily it doesnt crop up too much and it didnt have an impact on the outcome. If you gave the benifit to the defending team there would still be this situation. Im not sure what the answer is

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach22777
JoinedServiceReputation
May 200619 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jun 2020Feb 2018LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: BlackNwhite "im not sure, this is where the BOTD rule is a bit silly. Luckily it doesnt crop up too much and it didnt have an impact on the outcome. If you gave the benifit to the defending team there would still be this situation. Im not sure what the answer is'"

well the obvious answer I would think is he gives what he thinks is the correct decision, if he really cannot make a call the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking side. Which is fair enough really.

I just cant believe he honestly thought it was that close

j.c
RankPostsTeam
Player Coach6858
JoinedServiceReputation
Oct 200915 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Sep 2019Nov 2018LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



if its impossible for the vr to make the correct call then shouldn't he hand the decision back to the referee?

RankPostsTeam
International Chairman28357
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 200223 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
May 2024Oct 2019LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: BlackNwhite "whats to say the tip of the ball didnt hit the ground? we couldnt see in the frames available?'"


What's to say it did?
It is logical to suggest that, especially in the second available, the ball couldn't pass through the defender's leg to touch the ground.
It is pure speculation, supported by nothing at all, to suggest that it might have done. What we know is that the path to the ground was blocked, and then in a second the ball has gone UP, away from the ground.

Quote: BlackNwhite ""[iThe Referee should not disallow a try because he was not in a position to see the grounding of the ball.[/i"
This seems reasonable and I see no reason why it shouldn't apply to the Video Ref.'"

But it does apply. Why wouldn'tt it? The laws are the same for all officials! The reason why this 'try' should have been disallowed is [inot[/i because the VR was in no position to see the ball being grounded, but because there was no reason to belive that it [ihad[/i been grounded. Otherwise you are arguing that it's a try every time the ball disappears from view. Which I hope you're not, as that would be extra dumb.

SBR
RankPostsTeam
International Board Member5064
JoinedServiceReputation
Aug 200222 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Sep 2017Feb 2016LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: Ferocious Aardvark "But it does apply. Why wouldn'tt it? The laws are the same for all officials! The reason why this 'try' should have been disallowed is [inot[/i because the VR was in no position to see the ball being grounded, but because there was no reason to belive that it [ihad[/i been grounded. Otherwise you are arguing that it's a try every time the ball disappears from view. Which I hope you're not, as that would be extra dumb.'"


The reason to believe it might have been grounded was that it was heading towards the ground when it was last visible. Now it might have hit the defender's leg and then come up, it might have slipped down the side of the defender's leg and hit the ground before coming up, it might have been held up without hitting anything. Maybe he briefly lost control of the ball and knocked on. We don't know. I doubt anyone, even the players involved in the tackle, know.
As we haven't seen any reason to disallow the try your only option would be to disallow it because you can't see the grounding.

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach2391
JoinedServiceReputation
Nov 200519 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Oct 2020Jun 2019LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: SBR "The reason to believe it might have been grounded was that it was heading towards the ground when it was last visible. Now it might have hit the defender's leg and then come up, it might have slipped down the side of the defender's leg and hit the ground before coming up, it might have been held up without hitting anything. Maybe he briefly lost control of the ball and knocked on. We don't know. I doubt anyone, even the players involved in the tackle, know.
As we haven't seen any reason to disallow the try your only option would be to disallow it because you can't see the grounding.'"
then youd be making an assumption the ball didnt hit the ground thus giving the botd to the defense icon_biggrin.gif once again the ref made the right call lol

RankPostsTeam
International Chairman28357
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 200223 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
May 2024Oct 2019LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: SBR "The reason to believe it might have been grounded was that it was heading towards the ground when it was last visible. ...'"


You see this is the ultimate reason we'll never agree. We both watched the same thing, but saw something different - as obviously Ganson think she did too. The ball was with respect [inot[/i heading towards the ground when last we saw it, it had very clearly landed on top of the defender's leg. How was it "heading" anywhere south, beyond that?

A quick arithmetical calculation suggests that had the ball been placed on the leg at a speed of at least about 1,830 mph then it may have burst or deformed around the leg enough to likely touch the ground with some bit, or at 16,000 mph probably enough kinetic enertgy to go through the leg, but I don't think either situation applied.

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach22777
JoinedServiceReputation
May 200619 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jun 2020Feb 2018LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: SBR "The reason to believe it might have been grounded was that it was heading towards the ground when it was last visible. Now it might have hit the defender's leg and then come up, it might have slipped down the side of the defender's leg and hit the ground before coming up, it might have been held up without hitting anything. Maybe he briefly lost control of the ball and knocked on. We don't know. I doubt anyone, even the players involved in the tackle, know.
As we haven't seen any reason to disallow the try your only option would be to disallow it because you can't see the grounding.'"

It may have done all these things and more, even things so cool no-one has even imagined them yet. But thats not really relevant.

We have seen a reason to disallow the try, that the ball was on the players leg, we dont have conclusive evidence for that but any sensible opinion would surely be that was the most likely occurrence and as such the try shouldnt have been given.

The only justification for giving that try you have brought, is that there isnt conclusive evidence against it, just some pretty good evidence.

RankPostsTeam
International Chairman9721
JoinedServiceReputation
Dec 200123 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Aug 2020Apr 2020LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



[sizeIF IN DOUBT, THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT IS GIVEN TO THE ATTACKING TEAM!!!!![/size

Now what part of that statement as applied here in GB and in Aus are people having difficulty with? icon_rolleyes.gif icon_rolleyes.gif icon_rolleyes.gif

RankPostsTeam
Player Coach22777
JoinedServiceReputation
May 200619 years
OnlineLast PostLast Page
Jun 2020Feb 2018LINK
Milestone Posts
0
100
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Signature
TO BE FIXED



Quote: Leaguefan "[sizeIF IN DOUBT, THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT IS GIVEN TO THE ATTACKING TEAM!!!!![/size

Now what part of that statement as applied here in GB and in Aus are people having difficulty with? probably the idiotic nature of that statement and the ridiculous game it would lead to if it was ever applied

92 posts in 7 pages 
<<   PREV  NEXT   >>
Subscribe | Moderators: Admin, Durham Giant , TimperleySaint
92 posts in 7 pages 
<<   PREV  NEXT   >>
Subscribe | Moderators: Admin, Durham Giant , TimperleySaint



All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.

Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.

RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.

Copyright 1999 - 2024 RLFANS.COM

You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.



Please Support RLFANS.COM


8.93798828125:10
RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
Recent
Transfer Talk V5
Once were Lo
518
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
11s
Film game
karetaker
5766
13s
DoR - New Coach - Investor & Adam - New signings
Theeaststand
4048
15s
BORED The Band Name Game
Boss Hog
63268
16s
Rumours and signings v9
Mark_P1973
28902
50s
Shirt reveal coming soon
Khlav Kalash
2
56s
Transfer Talk V5
Once were Lo
518
58s
2025 Fixtures
Jemmo
1
1m
Spirit of the Rhinos
chapylad
6
1m
Opening Championship and League One Fixtures for 2025 Released
RLFANS News
1
1m
Ground Improvements
phe13
198
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
Shirt reveal coming soon
Khlav Kalash
2
TODAY
Opening Championship and League One Fixtures for 2025 Released
RLFANS News
1
TODAY
Getting a new side to gel
Wigan Bull
2
TODAY
Fixtures
Hockley Bron
12
TODAY
Writers required
H.G.S.A
1
TODAY
2025 Fixtures
Jemmo
1
NEWS ITEMS
VIEWS
POSTSONLINEREGISTRATIONSRECORD
19.65M 1,278 ↓-5480,15614,103
LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.

When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
RLFANS Match Centre
 Thu 13th Feb 2025
     Mens Super League XXX-R1
20:00
Wigan
v
Leigh
 Fri 14th Feb 2025
     Mens Super League XXX-R1
20:00
Hull KR
v
Castleford
20:00
Catalans
v
Hull FC
 Sat 15th Feb 2025
     Mens Super League XXX-R1
15:00
Leeds
v
Wakefield
17:30
St.Helens
v
Salford
       Championship 2025-R1
18:00
Toulouse
v
Widnes
 Sun 16th Feb 2025
     Mens Super League XXX-R1
15:00
Huddersfield
v
Warrington
       Championship 2025-R1
15:00
Bradford
v
LondonB
15:00
Featherstone
v
Doncaster
15:00
Oldham
v
York
15:00
Sheffield
v
Halifax
15:00
Barrow
v
Hunslet
 Thu 20th Feb 2025
     Mens Super League XXX-R2
20:00
Wakefield
v
Hull KR
 Fri 21st Feb 2025
     Mens Super League XXX-R2
20:00
Warrington
v
Catalans
20:00
Hull FC
v
Wigan
 Sat 22nd Feb 2025
     Mens Super League XXX-R2
15:00
Salford
v
Leeds
20:00
Castleford
v
St.Helens
 Sun 23rd Feb 2025
     Mens Super League XXX-R2
14:30
Leigh
v
Huddersfield
       League One 2025-R1
15:00
Cornwall
v
Workington
15:00
Dewsbury
v
Crusaders
ALL SCORES PROVIDED BY RLFANS.COM (SETTINGS)
Matches on TV
Thu 13th Feb
SL
20:00
Wigan-Leigh
Fri 14th Feb
SL
20:00
Hull KR-Castleford
SL
20:00
Catalans-Hull FC
Sat 15th Feb
SL
15:00
Leeds-Wakefield
SL
17:30
St.Helens-Salford
Sun 16th Feb
SL
15:00
Huddersfield-Warrington
Thu 20th Feb
SL
20:00
Wakefield-Hull KR
Fri 21st Feb
SL
20:00
Warrington-Catalans
SL
20:00
Hull FC-Wigan
Sat 22nd Feb
SL
15:00
Salford-Leeds
SL
20:00
Castleford-St.Helens
Sun 23rd Feb
SL
14:30
Leigh-Huddersfield
Thu 6th Mar
SL
20:00
Hull FC-Leigh
Fri 7th Mar
SL
20:00
Castleford-Salford
SL
20:00
St.Helens-Hull KR
Sat 8th Mar
SL
17:30
Catalans-Leeds
Sun 9th Mar
SL
17:30
Warrington-Wakefield
SL
17:30
Wigan-Huddersfield
Thu 20th Mar
SL
20:00
Salford-Huddersfield
Fri 21st Mar
SL
20:00
St.Helens-Warrington
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Mens Betfred Super League XXVIII ROUND : 1
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Wigan 29 768 338 430 48
Hull KR 29 731 344 387 44
Warrington 29 769 351 418 42
Leigh 29 580 442 138 33
Salford 28 556 561 -5 32
St.Helens 28 618 411 207 30
 
Catalans 27 475 427 48 30
Leeds 27 530 488 42 28
Huddersfield 27 468 658 -190 20
Castleford 27 425 735 -310 15
Hull FC 27 328 894 -566 6
LondonB 27 317 916 -599 6
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Betfred Championship 2024 ROUND : 1
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Wakefield 27 1032 275 757 52
Toulouse 26 765 388 377 37
Bradford 28 723 420 303 36
York 29 695 501 194 32
Widnes 27 561 502 59 29
Featherstone 27 634 525 109 28
 
Sheffield 26 626 526 100 28
Doncaster 26 498 619 -121 25
Halifax 26 509 650 -141 22
Batley 26 422 591 -169 22
Swinton 28 484 676 -192 20
Barrow 25 442 720 -278 19
Whitehaven 25 437 826 -389 18
Dewsbury 27 348 879 -531 4
Hunslet 1 6 10 -4 0
RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
Recent
Transfer Talk V5
Once were Lo
518
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
11s
Film game
karetaker
5766
13s
DoR - New Coach - Investor & Adam - New signings
Theeaststand
4048
15s
BORED The Band Name Game
Boss Hog
63268
16s
Rumours and signings v9
Mark_P1973
28902
50s
Shirt reveal coming soon
Khlav Kalash
2
56s
Transfer Talk V5
Once were Lo
518
58s
2025 Fixtures
Jemmo
1
1m
Spirit of the Rhinos
chapylad
6
1m
Opening Championship and League One Fixtures for 2025 Released
RLFANS News
1
1m
Ground Improvements
phe13
198
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
Shirt reveal coming soon
Khlav Kalash
2
TODAY
Opening Championship and League One Fixtures for 2025 Released
RLFANS News
1
TODAY
Getting a new side to gel
Wigan Bull
2
TODAY
Fixtures
Hockley Bron
12
TODAY
Writers required
H.G.S.A
1
TODAY
2025 Fixtures
Jemmo
1
NEWS ITEMS
VIEWS


Visit the RLFANS.COM SHOP
for more merchandise!