Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 12:31 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

hang on, for mine that means whiting made the ball be technically in touch so, head and fead to Saints, but not a 40:20

Correct. The ball wasn't in touch until Whiting touched it, therefore making the ball dead. H and F Saints. Correct decision by TJ and Ref. (The real ref I mean not the imaginary one RG refers to)

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 12:34 pm  

mistermoo wrote:

Correct. The ball wasn't in touch until Whiting touched it, therefore making the ball dead. H and F Saints. Correct decision by TJ and Ref. (The real ref I mean not the imaginary one RG refers to)

So if Whiting had caught the ball in the bottom row of the stand it would still have been head and feed to Saints?

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 12:41 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

So if Whiting had caught the ball in the bottom row of the stand it would still have been head and feed to Saints?

now you're being daft and you know it, but yes, concievably if it hadnt touched the ground, it would only be in touch when he caught it, and he was in contact with the ground, thems the rules as i see it

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 12:48 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

now you're being daft and you know it, but yes, concievably if it hadnt touched the ground, it would only be in touch when he caught it, and he was in contact with the ground, thems the rules as i see it

I was just using that exaggeration to make the point.
Meli kicked the ball, it bounced in the field of play to a player who was outside the field of play. Therefore if you read that ruling the ball has gone into touch and has NOT been carried in by Whiting.
He can't carry it out if he's not in the field of play can he? The ball is "dead"

It was just a wrong call, which actually came from the touchjudge, and trust me I did check with a referee.

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 12:52 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

I was just using that exaggeration to make the point.
Meli kicked the ball, it bounced in the field of play to a player who was outside the field of play. Therefore if you read that ruling the ball has gone into touch and has NOT been carried in by Whiting.
He can't carry it out if he's not in the field of play can he? The ball is "dead"

It was just a wrong call, which actually came from the touchjudge, and trust me I did check with a referee.

The ball wasn't out of play until Whiting touched it! What is wrong with you? If he had of jumped and patted the ball back would it have been play on?

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 1:03 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

I was just using that exaggeration to make the point.
Meli kicked the ball, it bounced in the field of play to a player who was outside the field of play. Therefore if you read that ruling the ball has gone into touch and has NOT been carried in by Whiting.
He can't carry it out if he's not in the field of play can he? The ball is "dead"

It was just a wrong call, which actually came from the touchjudge, and trust me I did check with a referee.

he doesnt have to carry it out, a player can be in touch, reach for a ball still within the field of play and as soon as he touches it (and he is in contact with the ground), the ball becomes in touch. This is not some new magical rule, this has been how it is for as long as i can remember

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 1:04 pm  

mistermoo wrote:

The ball wasn't out of play until Whiting touched it! What is wrong with you? If he had of jumped and patted the ball back would it have been play on?

No it wouldn't have been play on as he had entered the field of play from outside the field of play (he was on the touchline).

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 1:08 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

he doesnt have to carry it out, a player can be in touch, reach for a ball still within the field of play and as soon as he touches it (and he is in contact with the ground), the ball becomes in touch. This is not some new magical rule, this has been how it is for as long as i can remember

Correct,
If a player is stood on the touchline he is considered to be part of the touchline i.e out of play. Saints in that case kicked the ball out of play. Head and feed to Hull.

The TJ got it wrong.

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 1:11 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

No it wouldn't have been play on as he had entered the field of play from outside the field of play (he was on the touchline).

Had he have JUMPED I said! How can he out of play if he has jumped?

The only reason the ball was out of play was because he touched it with his feet on the touchline. I don't know if you're just stupid or winding me up!!!

Re: Unacceptable bias : Thu May 05, 2011 1:13 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

Correct,
If a player is stood on the touchline he is considered to be part of the touchline i.e out of play. Saints in that case kicked the ball out of play. Head and feed to Hull.

The TJ got it wrong.

that cannot be right! the player is considered to be out of play, but not part of the touchline, the emphasis is on the player to be in play or this (as chris saint alluded to) would be open to massive abuse