Annesley is not fibbing when he says he was at a loss to explain how the ball went forward.......he is at a loss to explain anything when it comes to his officials decisions. At least he took ownership of the obstruction play because THAT needed no explanation...but it needed proper and correct action by his onfield officials at the time it occurred...
Does not matter one little bit whether he construes it as a pass he threw it with his right arm
But admitted to another mistake that cost Bulldogs
wwos.nine.com.au
The NRL has admitted Canterbury were hard done by in yesterday's 18-16 loss to Parramatta, confirming a disallowed try to the Bulldogs should have been awarded.
However, the governing body's head of football, Graham Annesley, backed referee Chris Sutton over another controversial moment that occurred on the final play of the match.
With the Eels leading by two points as the siren sounded, the Bulldogs kicked downfield, with Eels winger Maika Sivo collecting the ball and throwing it into touch. Replays showed the ball travelled forward by some distance, with suggestions the Eels should have been penalised for a deliberate forward pass.
That would have allowed the Bulldogs to have a shot at goal to level the scores and send the match into extra time.
In explaining the decision at his weekly briefing, Annesley was at a loss to explain how the ball went so far forward.
"It's not a pass, he throws it into touch. He's got the ball in his right arm, I ask you to look at the motion of his right arm as he throws it," he said.
"His hand comes right around in front of his chest. The ball, in some kind of way that I can't explain, goes on a banana pass.
"It goes on some kind of arc when he throws it. I can't explain the physics of that."