Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="subsbligh, post: 2475824, member: 1950"] By the way the threshold is not "conclusive" evidence it is [I]â€‹sufficient[/I]â€‹ evidence. [url]http://www.nrl.com/laws-of-the-game-video-referee/tabid/10874/newsid/71023/default.aspx[/url] There is a vital distinction here that you miss AP. Argue how you will, there is not sufficient evidence to deny that the ball touched the line. If the referree's decision was "no try", I would say that there would not be sufficient evidence to say the ball touched the line and the "no try" decision would have held. It should have been a try based on that test and the on-field referree's decision. Overturning a live "Try" decision is a higher threshold than overturning a "No-Try" decision when you have inconclusive evidence like this. Hopefully they get it right in Round 2 and for the rest of the season. [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 14 (members: 0, guests: 14)