Opinion Video ref forward pass adjudication

[TalDog]

Has only ever happened twice both times against our team can’t believe this is not good more attention outside of the kennel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Raff]

They need to be consistent. I've always heard the bunker can't officiate on forward passes.

 

[Big_Kahunas]

They ruled it was a knock on, but it was never a knock on because it never hit the ground or an opposition player so they couldn't rule that it was a knock on. Am I missing something?

 

[King Gus]

They ruled it was a knock on, but it was never a knock on because it never hit the ground or an opposition player so they couldn't rule that it was a knock on. Am I missing something?

You are definitely missing something, the original challenge was about who took the ball into touch, but instead reviewing the challenge they decided to review the play before.
Now since the ball never hit the ground it is not a knock on so they called it forward, so the dumb ***** ruled it as a forward pass.

 

[ouwet]

I think they ruled knock on from a technicality... Crighton never passed the ball he batted it hence the knock on call.

 

[King Gus]

I think they ruled knock on from a technicality... Crighton never passed the ball he batted it hence the knock on call.

Ball doesn’t touch the ground or another player, it can’t be a knock on, batting the ball isn’t a knock on every team does it and if the ref calls a forward fine but the bunker had no right to say that ball travelled forward.

 

[soc123_au]

Has only ever happened twice both times against our team can’t believe this is not good more attention outside of the kennel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It's happened against Penrith a few times, because it's a tap on and not a pass it gives them a technicality to rule on it. The one yesterday was a mile forward, so as murky as the bunker making the call is, it was the right call. It certainly isn't a conspiracy against the Dogs though.

 

[King Gus]

It's happened against Penrith a few times, because it's a tap on and not a pass it gives them a technicality to rule on it. The one yesterday was a mile forward, so as murky as the bunker making the call is, it was the right call. It certainly isn't a conspiracy against the Dogs though.

So why don’t they use the bunker for forward pass then?

 

[chemdog]

tap on is never a knock on so I don't get how they can rule on that but yes the pass was forward which the bunker can't rule on

 

[soc123_au]

So why don’t they use the bunker for forward pass then?

Didn't say I agreed with it, just commenting on how they rule it. Like everything else it's not consistent, I have seen tap ons hit the ground and been let go that were further forward than yesterdays effort. It's a lottery half the time. Not unique to one team though.

 

[CroydonDog]

tap on is never a knock on so I don't get how they can rule on that but yes the pass was forward which the bunker can't rule on

I've been wondering that - when does it become a "pass"? (i'm no aficionado of the rules).

 

[King Gus]

Didn't say I agreed with it, just commenting on how they rule it. Like everything else it's not consistent, I have seen tap ons hit the ground and been let go that were further forward than yesterdays effort. It's a lottery half the time. Not unique to one team though.

Everything in the NRL is never consistent, thats why you have refs manipulating games.
They made rules so the ref can use discretion, we go pinned for a six again 4 times on the last for ruck infringement and 1 on the sixth tackle work that out.

 

[ouwet]

Ball doesn’t touch the ground or another player, it can’t be a knock on, batting the ball isn’t a knock on every team does it and if the ref calls a forward fine but the bunker had no right to say that ball travelled forward.

I don't agree with it but I think that's how they ruled on it.

 

[soc123_au]

Everything in the NRL is never consistent, thats why you have refs manipulating games.
They made rules so the ref can use discretion, we go pinned for a six again 4 times on the last for ruck infringement and 1 on the sixth tackle work that out.

We had 3 Tigers on report for one penalty for markers not square on Saturday. It's across the board.

When were your six agains ruled against you? I watched the game, but not closely enough to pay that much attention to that. I'd guess though that it was when you were well on top, if so, welcome to being good again. Happens to us most weeks.

 

[Lynchpin]

when does it become a "pass"?

When its exponent is wearing a Blue and White Jersey.

 

[Lynchpin]

We had 3 Tigers on report for one penalty for markers not square on Saturday. It's across the board.

When were your six agains ruled against you? I watched the game, but not closely enough to pay that much attention to that. I'd guess though that it was when you were well on top, if so, welcome to being good again. Happens to us most weeks.

Worse, at least 2 of them were on tackles 4 and 5. Both very soft considering we very rarely get any at all (it was 4-1 against yesterday, and 10m was 1-0 against), even with oppositions deliberately spoiling. (Penalties 6-2 against).

The Rorters comeback, and the dry spell either side of Chricton's try yesterday were both by-products of "ruck discretion" Refs leaning on the scales in favour of "game management" over refereeing what's actually happening in front of them.

Still, the Dogs finally did what they've been threatening to do all year and what we've all been waiting for - took the result entirely out of the Ref's incompetent hands.

Reflective score from yesterday would be more like 48-6. So the Ref was good enough for a +18 for the hapless Knights.

 

[albatross]

Rightly or wrongly the bunker is making a distinction between a ‘tap-on’ that goes forward and a ‘catch-and-pass’ that goes forward. Apparently their eyes only work in one of those scenarios, and even then, only in Bulldogs games.

 

[D.O.W.]

They (officials) appeared to try and get around the rule by technicality calling it a knock on… but it was a bat-on which is a pass.

No surprises with us being the victim.

 

[cookieman909]

The big thing was how did we keep that challenge? Was it explained on TV? I assumed it was challenge unsuccessful and we lost it. But then we used another challenge later when Kikau took out Best. How did we get two unsuccessful challenges?

 

[TwinTurbo]

The big thing was how did we keep that challenge? Was it explained on TV? I assumed it was challenge unsuccessful and we lost it. But then we used another challenge later when Kikau took out Best. How did we get two unsuccessful challenges?

The bunker didn't even look at what we were challenging. The bullshit "knock on" happened before it and they ruled on that. Can't lose a challenge on something that we weren't challenging.


Always a Bulldog