Round 11 Cronulla Sharks V Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs 20th of May 4.10pm Southern Cross Group Stadium

BurgoShark

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
slide rule said:
Agree about the drop kick.

The Brailey one seems like a "common sense" try to me, but I'd rather they go by the book and whatever that says (I don't know the wording). I can't think of any similar example where they have ruled the other way in recent times, but I'm sure it won't take long to see the same thing happen and a different interpretation applied.
Click to expand...

He can't possibly have been playing at the ball;he was tackling a different player and looking the opposite direction. Every time a player gets hit in the back with a kick it isn't a knock on or 6 to go.
 
BurgoShark

BurgoShark

Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
12,868
Reaction score
4,097
HaroldBishop said:
Fair enough mate, I didn't realise they said Slater's was correct.
Click to expand...

From the NRL video: "For this to be a drop kick the ball must be intentionally released from the hands and then immediately when it rebounds from the ground". Paulo's effort ticks those boxes.
 
Gards

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
18,502
Reaction score
2,136
Location
At the Tucky
burgess1978 said:
Yeah - but they came out after the Slater one and said it was the correct call.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/04/20/referees-boss-explains-slater-drop-kick-try/

Either they are both knock-ons or they are both tries. The NRL can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

"For this to be a drop kick the ball must be intentionally released from the hands and then kicked immediately it rebounds from the ground," Sutton said.

In that case 100% Paulo did not intentionally drop it so 100% the correct call of knock on

The problem is that it's a big assumption that Slater intentionally dropped the ball for his try but tbf Slater's dropped ball not being intentional was not so obvious as Paulo's which was just flat out an error and stuffed up grubber
 
Sir Chadley

Sir Chadley

Jaws
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
18,576
Reaction score
2,212
Location
The Ridge!
As I said in another thread, yes, the NRL came out and said the Slater one was the correct call but I think that was purely self preservation and not wanting to admit a mistake.
Behind the scenes I reckon they were saying, "Well we ****ed that one up, let's not do it again."
 
snowman

snowman

Total gronk
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
58,928
Reaction score
2,200
Location
In your head, rent free
burgess1978 said:
He can't possibly have been playing at the ball;he was tackling a different player and looking the opposite direction. Every time a player gets hit in the back with a kick it isn't a knock on or 6 to go.
Click to expand...

the ruling is, frawley kncoked the ball on and it touched another player

dead ball from there
 
snowman

snowman

Total gronk
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
58,928
Reaction score
2,200
Location
In your head, rent free
Gards said:
"For this to be a drop kick the ball must be intentionally released from the hands and then kicked immediately it rebounds from the ground," Sutton said.

In that case 100% Paulo did not intentionally drop it so 100% the correct call of knock on

The problem is that it's a big assumption that Slater intentionally dropped the ball for his try but tbf Slater's dropped ball not being intentional was not so obvious as Paulo's which was just flat out an error and stuffed up grubber
Click to expand...

paulo dropped it as he went to kick it, the nrl screwed themselves on the slater try, but that was the correct call
 
slide rule

slide rule

Jaws
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
20,485
Reaction score
465
Location
General Admission
Chad said:
As I said in another thread, yes, the NRL came out and said the Slater one was the correct call but I think that was purely self preservation and not wanting to admit a mistake.
Behind the scenes I reckon they were saying, "Well we ****ed that one up, let's not do it again."
Click to expand...

But they've said that they've got other calls wrong this year.

I actually don't mind if they continue with the Slater interpretation. Makes the game a bit more interesting. I want to see players wildly swinging with the boot when they drop the ball.
 
Milkshark

Milkshark

Great White
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
4,918
Reaction score
681
Gards said:
"For this to be a drop kick the ball must be intentionally released from the hands and then kicked immediately it rebounds from the ground," Sutton said.

In that case 100% Paulo did not intentionally drop it so 100% the correct call of knock on
Click to expand...

Paulo went to kick the ball but missed, so he intentionally dropped it?

You can't kick a ball without the ball leaving your hands at some point.
 
SharkShocked

SharkShocked

Bull Shark
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
2,311
Reaction score
54
Even the most 1 eyed bias supporter can't call that a try. Irrespective of any earlier decisions that may or may not have been incorrectly called correct.

He tried to kick the ball and practically ****ing stepped on it and tripped over.

Move on.
 
HaroldBishop

HaroldBishop

Megalodon
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
55,505
Reaction score
8,388
Location
Sydney
SharkShocked said:
Even the most 1 eyed bias supporter can't call that a try. Irrespective of any earlier decisions that may or may not have been incorrectly called correct.

He tried to kick the ball and practically ****ing stepped on it and tripped over.

Move on.
Click to expand...

Yeah
 
slide rule

slide rule

Jaws
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
20,485
Reaction score
465
Location
General Admission
SharkShocked said:
Even the most 1 eyed bias supporter can't call that a try. Irrespective of any earlier decisions that may or may not have been incorrectly called correct.

He tried to kick the ball and practically ****ing stepped on it and tripped over.

Move on.
Click to expand...
I don't see how by the rule book it's not a try. Especially given the staunch Slater explanation. It HAS to be a try.
 
Gards

Gards

Jaws
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
18,502
Reaction score
2,136
Location
At the Tucky
On second thought the NRL have these decisions backwards (based on their rules - not common sense where Paulo knocked on)

Paulo intentionally dropped it constituting a drop kick while slater accidentally dropped it meaning it wasn't a drop kick (but could be assumption of it actually being intentional and not an error)

Perhaps Paulo didn't get enough rebound factor, after ball touches ground i think his foot sorta comes over on top of the ball before it can bounce and then sorta knocks it backwards a bit with his foot

If we arn't playing in the Grand Final I hope we see one of these decisions for the lols
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top