Right at the start where he just ran in and impeded Inglis who was ruled to knock it on into Tuqiri. Should have been a penalty to Souths.
Yeah the penalty against SBW was spot on. It's a play the ball if the ref calls held and you don't hear it, but when you're actually on the ground the ref doesn't need to call held.
Would've been nice if we got an invite to the 2nd half. Still think we would've probably lost but tough to take when so many of the turning points in the game were calls/non-calls from the officials.
So I can hear your objective views again? Stop taking the piss MF Like I said regardless of what happened I still think Souths would've won. Burgess boys were awesome and Souths defence in controlling field position was brutal.
I don't pretend to be objective. Our views on what transpired in this game are subjective, by definition. There's a difference, however, between being subjective and being flagrantly biased. I'll let you guess into which category falls, say, the accusation of officials in general and of one in particular of giving your team the stitch-up and then using either fallacious or spurious examples to back up said preposterous claim, as you did when your side lost to Penrith. I'd genuinely like to hear what all these turning points were though. I'm at a real loss on that one. And I haven't seen people on here making a big song and dance about any call in particular.
I'll give you an example of just one crucial period but I'm not going to comment on it any further because I'm sure the Souffs fans on here want to discuss the game. In the minute preceding Greg Inglis's first try Luke Keary was offisde, Luke Keary knocked on and the ball was played incorrectly. None of which was called, it's tough to swallow so many non-calls when you're on the back of a 6-1 penalty count in the second half.
They had a terrible finals series and it was all due to their errors and penalties. They knew it all season long, all they had to was clean it up just a little bit. Even giving away penalties as a tactic, when you add the dumb ones on top of that is what hurts it so much. But even if that didn't change and they just minimised the errors it would have made a huge difference. In the end it cost them. At least they lost to a side who played really good and deserved it. Feels alot better than losing in a shitty contest like the Panthers game.
Also wtf happened to all their classic plays? Moa to SBW or vica versa with mini/maloney trailing (they did do it once but with nobody trailing but it needed to be done more than the one time) No kicks to tupou (big fucking surprise, they pulled off zero.. that's right, zero neat kicks across to tupou all season. reynolds had one game with him in country/city and pulled it off with ease) No shortball to cordner/pass it out back. Didn't set up that play properly once. No maloney cutout to tupou in their own half. Nobody trailing a hard sbw run close to the line for the fluke offload They did shit all.
I'll have to watch the full replay again for the first two as I don't recall them off the top of my head. http://youtu.be/v81fPUVJTfE?t=2m47s The last one is a matter of contention. We've all seen them let go and we've all seen them pulled up. The fact that the acting half, Sutton in this case, was able to retrieve the ball without much or any real impediment, or second effort from Luke, means the refs will usually let it go. The guidelines for referees say that so long as the bloke makes a genuine attempt to play it with his foot, it's all good. And that's fair enough IMO. We don't really need stoppages for this kind of thing. But if you do insist that this should've been called back, and I can perfectly understand why some people may feel that way, then you have to also agree that when SBW made an attempt to play it with his foot but didn't actually get anywhere near the ball, as happened close to his try line in the second half, then that must also be an infringement. By the interpretations they're both fine but by the actual laws of the game they're blatantly incorrect. I agree SBW's is less egregious in that he still rolled the ball towards his own line but by the rules you can't just make an attempt. You have to heel it backwards. As I said, I'm happy to let both go. They happen all the time and I think most of the time the refs just get on with it.
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Hac_IIf7beA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> "We've got contact from Sam Burgess" Ummmmmm.... just sums up the night personally for me a lot of head scratchers. 1 penalty from Souths in the 2nd half is amazing discipline.
Can't believe Ben Teo didn't start, I honestly don't know what Mcguire see's in Kyle Turner but Teo was brilliant before his suspension and played a huge role in changing the momentum Souths way in that first half. His defence all year has been brutal and he's become a real leader of their pack, Burgess is an obvious blow but I think the loss of Teo may be a little underestimated. I still don't think he's that great of an attacking player but his hitting has been top notch of late. That game against Manly @ the SCG he pretty much dominated their pack single handedly.
Almost as good as Easts' against Melbourne. 5 penalties in the first 35 minutes. Then 0 for the rest of the game. Or Easts' against South Sydney the last time. 7 in the first half. 0 in the second.
Sbw's ball didn't even roll at all he just put it on the ground and missed it completely. I thought it should have been a penalty. And the one Magic was referring to as well it looked like whoever played the ball kicked it slightly forward, they should have at least checked it. I got the feeling he purposely didn't check it to avoid scrutiny.
