Please help me get my head around this.

[bleedblue&white]

I know I might be splitting hairs but I have been stewing all day and could not get a play from last night out of my head.
At 17 39 sec of the first half Eastwood smashed the Storm winger and he knocked on, we recovered the ball and had a 4 on 1 with slater, Widdop then came from behind and knocked the pass down and slater recovered the ball ref ruled play on?
Firstly how in the hell did we get any advantage from the melbourne knock on we had only travelled 5m and earlier Cam smith had run 15m then knocked on but melbourne still got the loose and feed.
BUT my major concern is did Widdop come from an OFFSIDE position????
he never got behind where the melbourne player in fringed with the knock on so how can he be onside??? am I wrong???
This was never replayed or even really commented on during the broadcast and I may be one eyed and jaded but why do Melbourne consistantly get away with this bullshit.

 

[Big_Dawg]

I thought slater made the tackle

 

[The-Game]

Incompetent refs, they would of been sh*tting bits of pink because the ref's were so far up their as5. One thing I noticed aswell, after one of our players was tackled, either Smith or Cronk came in and jumped on the player. I thought once the player is tackled you cannot have a second dig. And of course Gus was spoofing over Storm.

 

[Gingerbread Man]

I thought exactly the same thing when I was watching it - how on earth did we get an advantage from that? Should have been a scrum our feed.

 

[obje]

News LTD owns the Storm, the NRL, and employs the commentators in various ways. There's no way they're going to put shit on their bosses horse when it's in a race.

 

[Chrisaaar]

Always getting the rub of the green.

 

[Nano]

Man I noticed that abit aswell and though it was total bs

 

[Stoofy]

News LTD owns the Storm, the NRL, and employs the commentators in various ways. There's no way they're going to put shit on their bosses horse when it's in a race.

Sad but true!

 

[HajdukSplit]

Bring back the Super League and leave Melbourne in the nrl

 

[The DoggFather]

News LTD owns the Storm, the NRL, and employs the commentators in various ways. There's no way they're going to put shit on their bosses horse when it's in a race.

Do you think they know the meaning of "conflict of interest"?

 

[Barba's Barber]

I was at the game and thought the same thing. I think its because the Storm supporters didn't make a fuss so the ref played on.
I was pretty dirty on that play going unnoticed.
I don't have a voice left after last night lol Gave it to the Storm faithful BIG TIME!!
We were so close to winning and it came down to the wire

 

[El_Magic]

I said the same thing. No advantage at all. The Smith play was pulled back even though he ran 15 metres

 

[Allan]

People are saying some very ordinary things about the refs but in my opinion:

1. They are doing a good job. Its a fast game and errors will be made.

2. Most of the really poor referee judgments appear to come from the video ref. Cronk's try should have been a try every day of the week. The video ref got it wrong and they do lots of the time.

3. Most of the penalties we get against us we deserve to get. For example, you play Halatau you know he will give away at least one penalty and you just hope it is doesn't cost a try but sometimes it does.

4. Storm are the most boring team in the comp but they execute their plan almost flawlessly. I don't think they are corrupt or have the refs onside they are just machines. Ban them for being boring or playing not in the spirit of the game but lets stop hammering referees. If you want precise refereeing watch NFL where they stop every 38secs

 

[Markb]

I thought the same thing. Double knock on, no advantage play the first knock on. Scrum 10m out. Bulldog feed. Bulldog try. 24 to 22 Bulldog win. Thanks for coming

 

[Bob dog]

Thats what I thought, Bulldog feed, but nup was robbed.

 

[tips]

From memory I thought a couple of years ago they clarified "10m was deemed an advantage". With the 10m lines all marked it would be a good opportunity for teams to razzle dazzle and refs to rule on, if it goes arse up within ten meters go back to the scrum. If they are tackled within 10 meters, play on, zero tackle, but if they lose the ball, pull it up. Play should be able to go backwards and forwards across the park within that ten meters as many times as they like.

 

[no1bulldog]

People are saying some very ordinary things about the refs but in my opinion:


2. Most of the really poor referee judgments appear to come from the video ref. Cronk's try should have been a try every day of the week. The video ref got it wrong and they do lots of the time.

nope under the new rule if they make ANY contact with a defender no matter if its on the opposite side of the field and they had no hope at all of being involved they still have to call obstruction

 

[VAI]

Apparently the ruling is: if you take the line as a decoy and make contact with the chest or side/shoulder of the defender which is in the direction of play, it is obstruction.

In most cases, a decoy runner should be able to hit the gap to the other side of the defender so not to impede, even remotely, that defender from being able to progress from where they are standing, regardless of whether it is assumed they will be able to get to the ball carrier or not. It removes all doubt over possible scenarios and opportunities for coaches to exploit this. I mean really, just hit the gap on the other side of the defender, don't run into them directly.

This interpretation given by Daniel Anderson suggests that contact with the other shoulder would be deemed as ok, because it's going away from the direction of play and not impeding. That's just the way it was reported, so we'll see. So long as they're consistent, then coaches know they can no longer get away with it and should stop employing the tactic the way they have been, for some time now. They'll just find something else to exploit