'What's he supposed to do?': Rare decision divides NRL fans

[Vlasnik]

'What's he supposed to do?': Rare decision divides NRL fans

Yahoo Sport Australia7 Apr. 2019, 5:32 pm

A controversial penalty try in Melbourne’s win over the Bulldogs has left fans divided.

Will Chambers was the beneficiary at AAMI Park on Sunday when the bunker ruled that he was tackled before gathering the ball in the in-goal.

Reimis Smith appeared to hit Chambers in the back milliseconds before he was about to grab the ball and plant it down for a try after a kick from Cameron Munster.

View photos
Will Chambers was awarded the penalty try. Image: Ch9
On-field referee Ben Cummins sent the decision to the bunker as a penalty try, and it was then confirmed.

Former players Michael Ennis and Braith Anasta agreed with the call in commentary.

“Smith hits him just before which is enough to award a penalty try,” Anasta said.

However opinion among fans was largely divided, with not everyone convinced about the rare call.

The @Storm have been awarded a penalty try. #NRLStormBulldogs 6-12 after 32 minutes. #TelstraPremiership





The tackle was simultaneous to when chambers made contact with the ball, disgraceful decision

Terrible, terrible call. What is he supposed to do? Let him score? He was playing at the ball. #NRLStormBulldogs


NRL
The @Storm have been awarded a penalty try. #NRLStormBulldogs 6-12 after 32 minutes. #TelstraPremiership





Tackle and chambers playing at the ball happened at the same time. Bad call.


NRL
The @Storm have been awarded a penalty try. #NRLStormBulldogs 6-12 after 32 minutes. #TelstraPremiership





Understand the rule and the call however very soft, tackled and touched ball same time not sure i really agree



The @Storm have been awarded a penalty try. #NRLStormBulldogs 6-12 after 32 minutes. #TelstraPremiership





Need to see it in slow motion but looks a very harsh call


NRL
The @Storm have been awarded a penalty try. #NRLStormBulldogs 6-12 after 32 minutes. #TelstraPremiership





Anyone who thinks this isn’t a penalty try is either a Dogs supporter or doesn’t know the rules.



real tough call - should smith just watch as chambers grounds it?


The Mole@9_Moley

Played the man, not the balll

Removing our Bulldogs bias what does the kennel think????


https://twitter.com/Eden_Richards

 

[JUNKYARD DOGS]

Try, but agree its a stupid rule and what was he supposed to do just let him score. Should be all out war when in a try scoring situation, fight to the death.

 

[KLil]

It is what it is.. If Smith put a bit more concentration on the ball and not the man he would have got away with it.

 

[GrogDog]

The kicker for me is how Chambers slowed down and took an eternity to play at the ball. Smith would not have seen where the ball is and from that angle the ball would have disappeared in front of Chambers so Smith had every reason to believe that old mate had the ball and was about to ground the ball for a try. Some responsibility must be placed on Chambers to not fuk around and effectively sheppard the ball from Smith having a fair go at it. Smith should be entitled to play at the man so for me NO TRY!

 

[Baby Blues]

Smith wasn’t in a position to make a genuine attempt at the ball and he takes out Chambers. I don’t like it but it’s a clear penalty try.

 

[CroydonDog]

It was a try any day of any week. Thought it was clear cut then as I do now.

 

[GDR]

im ok with decision tbh, its a 50/50 call that could of gone either way and there was only a fraction of a second in it.. what kill me is :

• the ridiculous wrestlte
• the blatant off side
• the hand on the ball in almost every tackle
• Cam Smith constantly around the neck of our tackled players
• The referee abuse by cam smith
• And early tackle on Jayden Okunbur when attempting to catch the ball with no eyes for the ball...

What about these things ?? thats what im blowing up about

 

[TwinTurbo]

Firstly I saw it as Smith reaching for the ball with his right hand, arm around Chambers, not to catch it but to punch/push it over the dead ball line. A perfectly legal play that happens many times in a game. Contact to Chambers was not the intention, Smith was making a play for the ball, which is and always has been totally legal.

Secondly, a penalty try is only supposed to be awarded when there is no doubt that a try would have been scored if not for the action. Smith was right onto Chambers in close proximity to the dead ball line and could have easily, very easily, tackled him once he had caught the ball out of the in goal and/or held him up as happened several times in the game. This was completely the wrong application of the rule.

Smith's actions didn't justify even a penalty and there was no certainty of a try being scored. It was a "hometown" call and should never have been made.

Go Dogs

 

[Mr Invisible]

At the time Tolman questioned it, and said it was simultaneous, he's allowed to tackle in that situation, and he's allowed to compete for the ball without being crowded.

Cummins then tells Tolman that Smith was penalised for "taking out the player". However that is not correct, as both players are competing for the ball.

If he tackles Chambers a metre or two before the ball, that's a fair penalty... however he was tackled literally as he was about to take the ball.

We see this every week in every game in the NRL competing for kicks, and nothing ever happens, yet we get a penalty try awarded against us for it?
We see this every week in every game in the NRL players tackled just as they receive the ball, and nothing ever happens, yet we get a penalty try awarded against us for it?

And early tackle on Jayden Okunbur when attempting to catch the ball with no eyes for the ball...

That's the one that annoyed me.

If the Reimis Smith contact is deemed a try, then Vunivalu HAS to get penalised for tackling Okunbor without the ball.
If the Vunivalu tackle without the ball ISN'T a penalty, then the penalty try (which mind you was the difference in the game) should never have been given.

 

[vegny]

Fair call. Unlucky to be a fraction of a sec early.

If this was in general play, would the penalty be given?

 

[Hacky McAxe]

"Fans are divided"

That's 'cause most fans don't know the rules. It's unfortunately but it was a clear penalty try by the rules.

 

[Indiandog]

Smith was blindsided and it was a touch n go decision.

you play the video in real time and it is a fair tackle and chambers loses the ball.

 

[K E]

Fair call. Latrell Mitchell's bitch would have grounded it if he wasn't pushed.

He's still Latrell Mitchell's bitch. When Latrell tells him to suck William replies "how deep, sir?"

 

[Scoooby]

I’m 50/50 on this, rules call it a try!! Common sense and referees discretion it’s not a try!!

End of the day we all know if you flip the coin we don’t get awarded a penalty try lol.

Just the way it is unfortunately !!

PRICKS!!!!!!

 

[Brendan7]

Put it this way if it were the Bulldogs scoring the try I'd be beyond annoyed if it wasn't given as a penalty try. That to me tells me that it's the right call probably. Was either a penalty try or a sin bin. I'd almost take the penalty try.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Fair call. Latrell Mitchell's bitch would have grounded it if he wasn't pushed.

I think you may need to watch it again, let's say Smith pushed Chambers ~1/10 of second later which would be without doubt legal. Chambers still ends up where he ended up, past the dead ball line. It wasn't like Chambers was diving to put the ball down, he was still upright and Smith had serious momentum on him. There was considerable doubt that he would have scored at all even if he caught the ball cleanly, which was in itself not guaranteed, he could have knocked it on just as easily. There were 2 things wrong with the penalty try call, not just the one where Smith was reaching for the ball.

Go Dogs

 

[Brendan7]

I think you may need to watch it again, let's say Smith pushed Chambers ~1/10 of second later which would be without doubt legal. Chambers still ends up where he ended up, past the dead ball line. It wasn't like Chambers was diving to put the ball down, he was still upright and Smith had serious momentum on him. There was considerable doubt that he would have scored at all even if he caught the ball cleanly, which was in itself not guaranteed, he could have knocked it on just as easily. There were 2 things wrong with the penalty try call, not just the one where Smith was reaching for the ball.

Go Dogs

Would you rather the penalty try or the sin bin? I know which one I'd rather and it's not close.

He would have scored.

 

[K E]

I think you may need to watch it again, let's say Smith pushed Chambers ~1/10 of second later which would be without doubt legal. Chambers still ends up where he ended up, past the dead ball line. It wasn't like Chambers was diving to put the ball down, he was still upright and Smith had serious momentum on him. There was considerable doubt that he would have scored at all even if he caught the ball cleanly, which was in itself not guaranteed, he could have knocked it on just as easily. There were 2 things wrong with the penalty try call, not just the one where Smith was reaching for the ball.

Go Dogs

Take the blue and white glasses off. If they give penalty trys for guys 10 metres from the ball, this is a penalty try ten times out of nine. You read that right.

 

[BELMORE]

If chambers grabbed the ball, exact same result would of occurred—he’s bundled out

 

[Brendan7]

If chambers grabbed the ball, exact same result would of occurred—he’s bundled out

No he would have scored 90 times out of 100. That is enough for a penalty try