2013 Grand Final - Sydney Roosters vs Manly Sea Eagles

That's an interesting point there about fatigue. If the Roosters were down to 12 men for that period & still only trailed 18-8, would they have had the energy to run Manly down?

 

Professional fouls should always be an automatic sin bin. Maybe if the rule was changed where inconclusive doesn't matter, a penalty try is awarded & the player is still sent to the bin.
It would certainly see actions by Aubusson & the one by Cronk in Origin (which should've been a penalty try, but wasn't), less likely to occur. Particularly if the players know there is effectively a double penalty for such an infringement.

 

If Horo went through the line, he would've taken out SBW & the try would've been disallowed.

But it isn't rare at all. You're using a match from early in the season as an example. 1 more try isn't a stretch in my opinion.

I think Roosters fans took it to a new level. To be belted in a Grand Final & claim the refs cost you is paranoia to the extreme.

I think the refs certainly helped the Roosters cause this year, but Manly still should not have lost when leading 18-8.

 

Anything else to add to that? Or is that the best you can come up with?

 

Ah, just when I thought someone couldn't be more unimaginative, you came along. Cheers.:original:

 

So in layman's terms. You believe the defence was impeded enough to prevent them from providing sufficient cover to stop the try.

Whereas my conclusion is the defence was sufficiently beaten before the contact & regardless, would not have stopped the try being scored.

 

I'm not the only person who thinks the refs were a disgrace.
But, I also said Manly shouldn't have lost after leading 18-8, regardless of what the refs were like. I guess you missed that point or just simply decided to overlook it because it didn't fit well with your whinge.

Also, it was 4 times, not 5.