Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="ivanhungryjak, post: 3400551, member: 2189"] Annesley has backed both “howlers”. Re the Obstruction call: “It was certainly not a ‘howler’ as some have suggested,” Annesley said. “The bunker official was Grant Atkins who is one of our leading referees, and the circumstances were such that the decision could have gone either way. The rules state that a ball carrier must not run behind an active block or flat runner and disadvantage the defensive line. “The critical question is whether the ball carrier passed the ball before running behind his own player. The rules also state that defensive decisions that commit defenders to initiating contact with an attacking player will not be deemed obstruction. Both of these rules were considered in reaching a decision and although people are free to agree or disagree with the judgement of the bunker, the relevant rules were objectively assessed in reaching the decision.” Re the Knights no try: “There was clear separation between the hand and the ball and it was not re-gripped before the ball was forced,” [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 65 (members: 0, guests: 65)