Cracking picture, only problem is you cannot see his hand or arm on the ball, go back 2 frames when his foot is off the floor when he makes first contact with the ball, it's a difficult call is his forearm still touching the ball when his foot lands?
run it at normal speed, then critisise, at the moment every London fan says he was on the floor, call it the other way every wire fan says he was still in the air.
touchy has to make a snap decision at full speed without slow motion.
Was it his error or was it sammuts error for not getting the ball out.
it was a 50/50 I agree, it went against us, does not make him a bad touchy.
for me and I am a London fan don't forget he was off his feet when he hit the ball, was his forearm still touching it when he landed , you can't tell from that picture or the tv shot.
that was not the deciding point of the game!

I do find it quite interesting that no one is arguing the Dixon try! To every wire fan, I put money on they are saying it was a double knock on! That one went our way and we are not knocking the VR for that one, it was the touchy that saw it by the way and suggested it should be checked. Few of the london players were watching it on the monitor by Angela powers, and thought it came of the forearm and then bounced fwd into sammuts hands, VR saw it as his chest. One is a knock on the other isn't, that one went our way.

NB - you are quite right. The Dixon try was one of the incomprehensible decisions made by those assisting the ref. Indeed, one of many. Child had a terrible night - the Hughes knock-on in the Hiku try was just as bad; and Atkins was inexplicably rescued by him twice, the latter call on 78 mins, killing the game in a rather sinister manner. It is difficult to imagine a more inept VR performance (though I am told we had one on Friday night).

As I said earlier, poor Liam Moore was badly let down. We fans were let down.

Anyone closer to the action have a view on the tackle in the last minute? I was stood on the opposite touchline so it wasn't clear but my impression was of a late tackle, possibly a cannonball? Thought it was a penalty.

It was a penalty and very clear on sky and the touch judge could not possibly have missed it unless he has a white stick.

The reason it was not given as a penalty! Ref had not called held, so legitimately he can join the tackle. Contact was midrift or top of thighs at worse, so no cannonball, he wasn't slowing the ptb down cos it was last, so there was no legitimate penalty. No dangerous contact, no effect on the next ptb, can't say it was late as tackle had not been called complete even though he was on one knee.
Interestingly the bench had it been a penalty gave the players the choice of go for draw or go for win.
TJ raiseed his flag didn't he? So he didn't miss it! Ref made the call of turn over I think with vr help

NB is the cannonball an offence against the rules, when executed before the ref shouts held?

Third man in hitting the legs you wouldn't think is against the rules more a morale thing. Don't the NRL make the third man in come in at waist height?

It wasn't a cannonball though, look where he came in it was at worst round his upper thigh dixon actually had one knee on the ground. Not defending it, it was a stupid thing to do, but there was nothing they could penalise him for, I wanted the penalty as much as anyone.
Any cannonball tackle is dangerous and should be a yellow! As for the NRL so what? We don't play NRL

So you've missed the question,

Is the cannonball an offence against the rules, when executed before the ref shouts held?

I'm not interested in the NRL, or Dixon or anything else (a bit like is it grounding or not, forget onside offside)

Thought I said, any cannonball tackle is classed as dangerous. And it was you that asked about NRL not me.
Wo it raises the question what is a cannonball tackle

So a second or third tackler coming into a player who is standing and puts unnecessary pressure against the normal direction of joint movement. So side on attack of the limb anywhere near or below the knee joint. Any head on attack to the knee or below forcing the joint against its normal direction of movement.
If a player comes in at the back of the knee it depends if it's done with force or not.
If someone is on one knee to be a cannonball it would have to be a targeted hit on the other leg

It wasn't a canonball tackle but it was a very, very, very late (and unnecessary) tackle. The tackle had been called, the ref blew his whistle as soon as Atkins made contact and the touchie was on the field. A minimum of a penalty for the lateness of the tackle as a prerequisite but the ref says "Lads, it's been reviewed, we're going handover". Who reviewed it as it wasn't a 50/50 call? James Child? Unbelievable.

The ref stated that he had not called held! Or blown his whistle, it's last tackle so the whistle is the signal that the tackle is complete. I heard the chat post match by the way.
So the question is, why is a late tackle or flop penalised? Two reasons? Could be due to dangerous or unnecessary contact or it slows down the restart ptb. There was no ptb restart to slow down as it was a handover, so what are you penalising??? You agree not a cannonball therefore not dangerous, so coming in late to prevent a quick ptb is the only reason he could have been penalised, it was last tackle, and handover so ptb was not prevented. 4 th tackle penalty everyday as he would have slowed the ptb
Rubbish rule but it's what it is.
And watch the playback the touchie and ref are talking hence the comment on review, I don't know if the VR chipped in.
The ref blew his whistle as Atkins made contact that signalled the ball dead until that whistle the ball is alive, and Atkins can come in to complete the tackle.

We're quibbling over the definition of 'cannonball ' - I was on that side of the pitch and that tackle was late, nasty and unnecessary!

My thoughts on the incident is that if one of our players had committed it, they would have been penalized. Without doubt.