We could of had the ref playing for us and lets face it we still would of lost. Theres no need for cheap ass tactics that went unpunished many times during the tournament which is a joke.

Besides that your post is bull

So you are saying it is fine for any player unable to legally prevent an oposition player from scoring to assault the player instead , as he will not receive any punishment ?

Fantastic

He was punished you clown. It was a penalty try. Do you understand what a "penalty" is? Just because you wanted him sent off so that England might have stood some slim chance of actually winning , despite not being the better side. That's what this is about, whinging that England lost even though they didn't deserve to win. Have a cry.

So if he tackled him legitimately , he would have scored , and England get 4 points and a conversion

He tackled him illegally , and England get 4 points and a conversion

So explain the punishment ? , you clown

Same as any penalty. He didn't score the try, but he was fouled, so it was given a try. That's the penalty. Same as the penalty try in the World Cup final, same as penalty try in the 1999 NRL grand final. You poms just want to whinge about something so you're whinging about this. What you actually want is a rule that says regardless of how sh:t England is and how much they get beaten by they still get the trophy. Like I said, have a cry you sore losers.

So a penalty try is now not a penalty. Genius. Only a whinging pom could come up with such nonsense after yet another much-deserved England loss. And as for the conspiracy theory about NRL referees having anything to do with an international performance in an event that has not the slightest thing to do with the NRL is the kind of ignorant crap we have come to expect from flatcaps, so no surprises there. Keep crying.

Thing is, is that the act of the penalty, the high shot, did not really prevent him from being able to move forward with momentum and move his arm out to place the ball on the deck to score.

That is what the aussies are saying. I can see that. It would never have been given as a penalty try here in oz. However, the game was not it Oz and played under international rules.


As for the commentators. Peter Sterling is very unbiased and actually is usually the only one on a panel that shows the game in the UK any respect. However even he commented that someone being just within 10m after being in an offside position from a kick, shouldn't really matter. This was unusual for him. Just an opinion I guess as opposed to any deliberate attempt at bias.

As for hearing the English commentary over here. It is embarassing with how one eyed it is. Get them off the telly. We look like pråtts.

Keep Carney. He is good, but not English. Hemmings is a joke but pretty accurately represents pom fans from what I can tell.

No. It was a normal try and then a red card. Pat took the kick from just to the left of the posts. He wanted an 8 point try but Ganson didn't give one.


Was the second Aussie try actually disallowed for offside? If you watch it further on, Watmough takes Sam without the ball allowing the Aussies to recover the ball

So if I rob a bank

But get caught and the bank gets it's money back

I don't get sent to prison ?

You? Yes, yes you would, for oxygen theft.