Obstruction??

[jmaamary]

Been consistent with players onside..... yes obstruction if he was onside
Fact was He was offside, so is not allowed to impede in the play
Both are facts
So how can an offside player who isn’t allowed to impede play be impeded by an obstruction when in fact he wasn’t allowed to make the tackle anyway
All facts champ

I’m not saying it’s right but it is how they have come to the decision. You are right but with him being offside, that’s the first infringement. They played advantage and in playing that advantage Elliott obstructed the knights player therefore it’s no try so saying they didn’t play advantage is technically wrong. It was given no try and we got the penalty. I don’t understand the blow up as we scored a few tackles later and kicked the goal too

 

[BlackDawg]

Elliot never ran a line on that play...he was stationery behind the play the ball. The person who he obstructed was offside...there was no defensive line to even make the conclusion that Elliot blocked him. The refs got so mnay things worng in todays game its entirely plausible to believe that there is a hidden agenda against the dogs.
The alleged try that Pearce scores they had a player inside the 10 who got involved in the play when he was offside at the kick. Not even a single run through by the video ref. Went straight to the put down. There wont even me a whisper in the press that the dogs were dudded either. Just how fucking masterful the knights were. Its a fucking joke.

 

[jmaamary]

Elliot never ran a line on that play...he was stationery behind the play the ball. The person who he obstructed was offside...there was no defensive line to even make the conclusion that Elliot blocked him. The refs got so mnay things worng in todays game its entirely plausible to believe that there is a hidden agenda against the dogs.
The alleged try that Pearce scores they had a player inside the 10 who got involved in the play when he was offside at the kick. Not even a single run through by the video ref. Went straight to the put down. There wont even me a whisper in the press that the dogs were dudded either. Just how fucking masterful the knights were. Its a fucking joke.

You can’t simply stand your ground anymore, staying stationary stops the defender from getting across to make the tackle. He is offside we got the penalty, it’s lazy from Elliott not showing any self awareness not knowing he could potentially obsruct a defender. I repeat I don’t agree with it but they have been consistent and Elliott should have none better

I completely agree with you on the Watson call. He was definitely inside the 10 but do you really think he affected the play?

 

[Bob dog]

How was foren disallowed a try when the player obstructed was offside???

Because its not in the script the shit kicker Bulldogs rise above and win

 

[CaptainJackson]

You can’t simply stand your ground anymore, staying stationary stops the defender from getting across to make the tackle. He is offside we got the penalty, it’s lazy from Elliott not showing any self awareness not knowing he could potentially obsruct a defender. I repeat I don’t agree with it but they have been consistent and Elliott should have none better

I completely agree with you on the Watson call. He was definitely inside the 10 but do you really think he affected the play?

Bro that defender should not even be making the tackle hes offside. So it is impossible for elliot to impede him because Barnett is NOT in play.

 

[Mr Invisible]

The defender ran PAST Elliott.

Try any day of the week.

 

[Alan79]

Sorry it’s not a try .... these days you cannot stand still with the oncoming defensive line because you will obstruct a defender. If the defender makes the decision to go in on Elliott it is a try but because Elliott made no effort to move out of his way, he is therefore obstructing the defender... I don’t agree with it but they are the rules

They should have played advantage... there’s that discretion and common sense thing I was talking about. Their decision making process doesn’t work like that, they see the obstruction so they can’t give a try but give us the penalty because the obstructed player was offside. The fact that none of the dogs players were blowing up shows you that they knew it was no try

You can’t simply stand your ground anymore, staying stationary stops the defender from getting across to make the tackle. He is offside we got the penalty, it’s lazy from Elliott not showing any self awareness not knowing he could potentially obsruct a defender. I repeat I don’t agree with it but they have been consistent and Elliott should have none better

I completely agree with you on the Watson call. He was definitely inside the 10 but do you really think he affected the play?

Elliott didn't run through the line in a decoy play. He was standing ready for an offload behind the man with the ball. An offside player deliberately brushed him to draw a penalty. If they wanted us to win advantage gets applied and it's ruled a try. Under the current rules there are too many grey areas and every week those grey areas are applied out of our favour. It's not just against us. You watch any game and one side cops dud calls all game to keep particular margins and score differentials in place. The referees in my opinion are out there to maximise the profit of our wonderful gambling sponsors.

 

[blue & white blood]

How was foren disallowed a try when the player obstructed was offside???

We seem to get more obstruction calls against us than any other team, every one of our try's goes up to the bunker no matter what, if this is not a plot by the NRL against us I don't know what is? we are getting stiffed game after game by these referees it seems to me the refs are the reason we are losing so many games, They also making sure we are getting trapped in our in goal time after time till the other team scores , I'm wondering if they haven't banded together and put some huge bet on us getting the spoon.

 

[Blue&whiteAxe]

Pay should cop most of the blame, it's disgraceful to see the state of them team he sends out. Finally in the 2nd half our halves get on the ball and the ball movement is a lot crisper but our forwards and especially our edges look clueless and fuck things up. We had more than enough ball and chances to put that game to bed.

In times like this all we can do is hope. My hope is that Pay gets sacked so I’m going to go to bed and hold onto that hope and sleep well.

 

[Blue&whiteAxe]

We seem to get more obstruction calls against us than any other team, every one of our try's goes up to the bunker no matter what, if this is not a plot by the NRL against us I don't know what is? we are getting stiffed game after game by these referees it seems to me the refs are the reason we are losing so many games, They also making sure we are getting trapped in our in goal time after time till the other team scores , I'm wondering if they haven't banded together and put some huge bet on us getting the spoon.

We get trapped in our in goal line because our defence is so shit the opposition teams make 80 metres every set and finish their sets with an easy grubber into our ingoal line. That’s not the referees that’s our brilliant defence.

 

[Superuber]

I think the decision is consistent with other calls similar in other games. A player can't hang in the defensive line, he should push straight through and not stop

Elliot was behind the play the ball, that is not the defensive line.
Newcastle rushed up, we’re offside so it should be play on.

The ref when awarding the penalty and talking to Pearce said it’s a penalty for offside we allowed it to continue but no advantage was gained so it’s a penalty to Bulldogs. How is scoring a try not an advantage

 

[Blue&whiteAxe]

Elliot was behind the play the ball, that is not the defensive line.
Newcastle rushed up, we’re offside so it should be play on.

The ref when awarding the penalty and talking to Pearce said it’s a penalty for offside we allowed it to continue but no advantage was gained so it’s a penalty to Bulldogs. How is scoring a try not an advantage

I don’t get it either. Lucky we scored the next play or else Pay would’ve made a 50K donation to the NRL

 

[jmaamary]

To clarify, I agree with all of you an offside player who was impeded who shouldn’t have been there should be void and play on, Foran try. That’s what the logical thing is but my point is the NRL is far from logical and the ruling is consistent with what they have been going with. The game needs reforming otherwise it won’t be around much longer

 

[bowleggedwog]

Shit rule but it was right. Bigger issue is lazy play by Elliott not moving . We scored anyway off the penalty. I would have hooked Elliot for lazy play.

 

[Boxer]

To clarify, I agree with all of you an offside player who was impeded who shouldn’t have been there should be void and play on, Foran try. That’s what the logical thing is but my point is the NRL is far from logical and the ruling is consistent with what they have been going with. The game needs reforming otherwise it won’t be around much longer

But there has never been a call like this before?
Offside... ref play on... dogs try.... ref no try penalty offside.

Why call play the advantage and call it a try but bunker over rules and gives us a penalty instead of a try?

Maybe coaches should introduce this in training,
If your on your line and out numbered on one side get a player to be offside and obstruct a player so they disallowed a try.
Penalty better than a try!

 

[coach]

But there has never been a call like this before?
Offside... ref play on... dogs try.... ref no try penalty offside.

Why call play the advantage and call it a try but bunker over rules and gives us a penalty instead of a try?

Maybe coaches should introduce this in training,
If your on your line and out numbered on one side get a player to be offside and obstruct a player so they disallowed a try.
Penalty better than a try!

Exactly this, I’ve been trying to tell h8m but he won’t listen coz his wrong
There hasn’t been a case like this
Spot on boxer

 

[TwinTurbo]

I would add that Foran caught the pass outside of Elliott, he didn't catch it inside him and run around behind. That's another NRL rule that they didn't apply.

Go Dogs

 

[jmaamary]

Exactly this, I’ve been trying to tell h8m but he won’t listen coz his wrong
There hasn’t been a case like this
Spot on boxer

For the 10th time I agree with you all but that’s how the refs are told to interpret it. Didn’t you see my comment before, their logic is all wrong.

Also it answer the question above, if it is seen as deliberate professional foul and sin bin.

 

[jmaamary]

Shit rule but it was right. Bigger issue is lazy play by Elliott not moving . We scored anyway off the penalty. I would have hooked Elliot for lazy play.

Exactly all players who have a coach with an 1/8th of a brain are told that standing still no longer makes you immune to being safe from obstruction

 

[KLil]

Bro that defender should not even be making the tackle hes offside. So it is impossible for elliot to impede him because Barnett is NOT in play.

And he had a fair attempt at making the tackle after all that shemozzle... Clear indication the NRL Picking and choosing when and how the obstruction rule is played.