Four Nations: Australia V England (Sunday 4pm)

Discussion in 'Matches' started by Boobidy, Oct 28, 2014.

  1. Hunter AD Hunt

    Fuck it would've been good for the game of Rugby League if it was a try. When was the last time, if ever Australia hasn't been in a Final?
     
  2. Hurricane JD Hurricane

    I think they said the 1950s and since 1968 since they lost two in a row. I only vaguely recall this though so happy to be corrected
     
  3. Alec AD Funkotron

    Why would you be happy? I'd probably actually kill the guy who corrected me.
     
  4. Quint Member

    One still frame from one angle doesn't show shit.
    I can't actually see where his finger is touching the ball in that shot. You are only presuming it is because it looks most likely. The other angles shown don't show him touching the ball. There was way too much doubt over this to be given a try.

    I'm right. You're wrong.
     
  5. Hurricane JD Hurricane

  6. Quint Member

    Yep. I'm that guy.
     
  7. Hurricane JD Hurricane

    I like it.
     
  8. The Boy Brumby ZJ Brumby

    That's pretty much how I see it. It feels counter intuitive to say it was a try but, as I understand the law which allows for grounding with the hand and forearm, it was a try.

    No one's going to attempt to argue the little finger isn't part of the hand, surely?

    If folk want to say the law is an ass, then fine. However, as it currently stands, had it been correctly applied it should have been a try, undeserving and spawny as it may've been.
     
  9. Hunter AD Hunt

    You support Parramatta. Your opinion is invalid.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2014
  10. Flack SA Flack

    The more I've heard about this, the more I say it's no try, because if Hall's is a grounding, so was Inglis' before him and it is therefore a drop out.

    Edit: Picture from youtube (Hard to stop it, and not exactly HD, but you get the point...)

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2014
  11. Tartmaster AJ James

    Still a wrong call that cost England massively.
     
  12. Flack SA Flack

    It cost them a drop out with 20 seconds to do something, in that case.
     
  13. Quint Member

    On the contrary...I've seen my team fuck up so often that I know exactly what it looks like when a team is fucking up.

    England done fucked up.
     
  14. Maroon_Faithful M Faithful

    I'd like to see common sense applied to grounding the ball by a defender. Yes at some point the ball was on the ground and Inglis was touching it but his clear intent was to bat it dead. Unless the bloke is trying to ground it, play on afaic.
     
  15. Bandwagon New Member

    Laws of the game are pretty clear there ( in the case of Inglis ) There has to be an intent to ground it....

    3. (a) Picking up the ball is not grounding it and a player may
    pick up the ball in his opponents’ in-goal in order to
    ground it in a more advantageous position.

    Although that's discussing the attacking player, the same would apply for the defender. The interpretation is used consistently when a defender picks the ball up off the the ground and runs it back into the field of play.
     
  16. Flack SA Flack

    He wasnt picking it up. How many times has it been called back for a dropout when the ball touches the ground as a player tries to get out of their I ngoal area? There isnt intent to ground it the either.
     
  17. Sultan Pepper HG Emm

    That's not the rule
     
  18. jazman84 JM Eightyfour

  19. Pretzel P Retzel

    Could you post a smaller photo please?
     
  20. jazman84 JM Eightyfour

    Click it you lazy prick.
     

Share This Page