Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="OXY-351, post: 2452704, member: 2107"] Do you comprehend English? I would have thought the key phrase in that statement is "in the ref's opinion", making the call a subjective one. If something didn't happen, the speculation that it would have happend is purely subjective. One persons perception on whether it would have happened could be totally different to someone else's perception. If you replaced "would" with "could" or "might" have been scored then you are making it even more subjective. Eg, if support player is taken out on their goal line, what's to say they could not have scored, or might not have scored, had they not been taken out. If there had to be abolsute certainty about a player scoring, then a penatly try should never be awarded, as had a foul not been commited, there is always the chance a player could have dropped a pass, not grounded the ball correctly etc anyway. You could argue that Craig Smith may have dropped the ball in grounding it in the 1999 gf, but there was a very high chance he would have scored had he not been taken high. I think it was a 50/50 call as to whether or not one was awarded in this case. I can see the arguments for and against it, but to argue that it shouldn't have been awarded because they should only be awared when there is absolutely no uncertainty that a player would have scored is just stupid. [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)