Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Rally Towel, post: 2775273, member: 8569"] My thoughts from our game : Titans competed hard as I thought they would. Losing Taylor hurt them, prior to they were running with purpose and getting a decent kick on the last to apply pressure. Once he left the field they were far less composed. Regarding the refereeing, i didn't read too much into it live but upon review, can see where the conjecture comes into it. Wasn't aware of the ruling regarding Kahu's penalty try. At the time, I thought it was a pretty handy try saver, but if that's the rule, then you have to award it. Ditto for Roberts and the infringement prior to the play the ball. You can't shoehorn in rule interpretations on the fly. Video ref can only call on infringement after play the ball. That said, he's a dumb ass for putting the boot in and deserves a week for it. Not as forceful not targeted at Kasiano's effort but a kick nonetheless. Titan player should have cleared the ruck but you can't put the boot in. Silly stuff from J Rob. Hard to call either way on Parker. Admittedly leading with his head but it's pretty common in scrums with that many knuckle heads jostling for position. As far as the end result goes, I can see why others have been critical of the refereeing. We did get some fortuitous calls, and in the end, the Titans were probably better than the scoreline suggested. However, I've never been one to pin on our losses on refereeing, no matter how dire. Teams get bad calls week in, week out. Good teams find a way to win regardless, losers look for excuses. I think we all know there's some dreadful inconsistencies in rulings these days. It needs to be cleaned up. However, there's inconsistency in media/commentator opinion according to their particular bias. Some want black and white rulings, others want decisions made with some room for interpretation. Case in point, the Kahu penalty try. You can't have it both ways. I'd argue rule changes need to be far more considered prior to implantation. If a rule is not functioning as intended, it was implemented with a poor definition to apply it. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 8 (members: 0, guests: 8)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now