RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
22 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!
WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Round 4 v Wakefield
Re: Round 4 v Wakefield Mon Apr 26, 2021 5:20 pm  

Trojan Horse wrote:
Trojan Horse Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 5:56 pm
Posts: 3473
MorningGlory23 wrote:
ComeOnYouUll wrote:
Didn't matter in the end but why did Thaler send this up as a No Try and why didn't the video ref overrule it?

Image

Because the refs and video refs are completely useless


I believe it is because in the process of the ball leaving his right hand the ball is resting on the wakey players leg and in contact. The moment when he transfers the ball from his right hand to left hand it looked to me like it bobbled.

It’s a 50/50 one. Wakey have had multiple this year chalked off. If the ref had sent as try it would have been given but there was enough to not overule the “no try” on field call.

I’ve felt hard done to as wakey have been in wrong end of loads of these. I personally think the on field call should be abolished and it should simply be sent up.

To be perfectly honest though I’m not sure if it was this try but the set leading up to one of Hulls try’sa hull player lost the ball (juggled it) and it hit a wakey defender and shot back to a hull player. Ref gave 6 again but was clearly a know on. I think it either led to this or a previous try so I was fuming at that but you just have to accept these decisions happen. It’s a sad state of affairs really but I feel the officials are right up against it. I’m not sure if 2 refs is the answer either.
Top six 2005 - Trinity.
Re: Round 4 v Wakefield Mon Apr 26, 2021 5:37 pm  

User avatarpmarrow wrote:
pmarrow User avatar
Silver RLFANS Member
Silver RLFANS Member

Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:39 am
Posts: 5843
Location: Hull

Trojan Horse wrote:
I picked it up at the time. He was in the line and Wood was sliding but “blocked” albeit momentarily the gap that was hit was where wood was sliding. Wood did not “take the bait” as he didn’t attempt to tackle Savelio but was sliding and simply blocked.

You have seen trys chalked off for far less and if it had gone up it could have been chalked off.

We can cry that we lost yet another player for HIA for the next game and this game too big the way cards are handed out and band is such a confusing element of the game you just lose all interest. As always the team that follows will benefit.

Not that I think we deserved to win. We lost composure in the final 10 gifting hull possession with silly offloads and mistakes in our own half. At least we didn’t collapse for a 20-30 minute spell this week.

We are up against it though as I think Hampshire broke his jaw and Jowitt could miss 4 weeks due to 2 concussions.

Add that to the current injury list.

Jowitt
Hampshire
TJ
Miller
Ashurst
Tupou
Josh Wood
A.Walker

I swear someone at wakey has smashed too many mirrors.




Saveillo didn't change his run into the defender, he is entitled to run that line. Woods hand also ended up around Saviello which is odd for a player not attempting to tackle..
Twitter : @TheResidentPete
Re: Round 4 v Wakefield Mon Apr 26, 2021 8:01 pm  

User avatarHomenaway wrote:
Homenaway User avatar
Eddie Hemmings's Wig
Eddie Hemmings's Wig

Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:21 pm
Posts: 131
Location: Kick'n'clap country!
Trojan Horse wrote:
I believe it is because in the process of the ball leaving his right hand the ball is resting on the wakey players leg and in contact. The moment when he transfers the ball from his right hand to left hand it looked to me like it bobbled.

It’s a 50/50 one. Wakey have had multiple this year chalked off. If the ref had sent as try it would have been given but there was enough to not overule the “no try” on field call.

I’ve felt hard done to as wakey have been in wrong end of loads of these. I personally think the on field call should be abolished and it should simply be sent up.

To be perfectly honest though I’m not sure if it was this try but the set leading up to one of Hulls try’sa hull player lost the ball (juggled it) and it hit a wakey defender and shot back to a hull player. Ref gave 6 again but was clearly a know on. I think it either led to this or a previous try so I was fuming at that but you just have to accept these decisions happen. It’s a sad state of affairs really but I feel the officials are right up against it. I’m not sure if 2 refs is the answer either.


To be honest (and I'm genuinely not having a go at you, Trojan Horse) we ALL tend to see things in the game from our own perspective and focus on our own team's bad luck/calls (me included), usually ignoring the bad luck/calls that the opposition get. For example, for Wakey's 3rd try it looked very much like the player chasing down Sneyd's kick (Batchelor?) COULD be offside, and if he isn't then, unless I'm mistaken, the player lying the wrong side of the tackle on Taylor (Mason Lino) who gets the ball from Batchelor's charge-down IS definitely offside and can't get involved in the next play (and can't be played onside). Thus the try should not have been awarded.

So we all cite examples of being hard done by, without the balance of things that went our way.
"If the human brain were so simple that we could understand it, we would be so simple that we couldn't." - Emerson M. Pugh
Re: Round 4 v Wakefield Tue Apr 27, 2021 9:12 pm  

Trojan Horse wrote:
Trojan Horse Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 5:56 pm
Posts: 3473
pmarrow wrote:
Trojan Horse wrote:
I picked it up at the time. He was in the line and Wood was sliding but “blocked” albeit momentarily the gap that was hit was where wood was sliding. Wood did not “take the bait” as he didn’t attempt to tackle Savelio but was sliding and simply blocked.

You have seen trys chalked off for far less and if it had gone up it could have been chalked off.

We can cry that we lost yet another player for HIA for the next game and this game too big the way cards are handed out and band is such a confusing element of the game you just lose all interest. As always the team that follows will benefit.

Not that I think we deserved to win. We lost composure in the final 10 gifting hull possession with silly offloads and mistakes in our own half. At least we didn’t collapse for a 20-30 minute spell this week.

We are up against it though as I think Hampshire broke his jaw and Jowitt could miss 4 weeks due to 2 concussions.

Add that to the current injury list.

Jowitt
Hampshire
TJ
Miller
Ashurst
Tupou
Josh Wood
A.Walker

I swear someone at wakey has smashed too many mirrors.




Saveillo didn't change his run into the defender, he is entitled to run that line. Woods hand also ended up around Saviello which is odd for a player not attempting to tackle..


While I get what your saying Wood was sliding laterally and Savelio was in the line which i the cause of the contact. I’m not quite sure what you wanted Wood to do. I don’t think phasing through Savelio was an option...
Top six 2005 - Trinity.
Re: Round 4 v Wakefield Tue Apr 27, 2021 9:14 pm  

Trojan Horse wrote:
Trojan Horse Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 5:56 pm
Posts: 3473
Homenaway wrote:
To be honest (and I'm genuinely not having a go at you, Trojan Horse) we ALL tend to see things in the game from our own perspective and focus on our own team's bad luck/calls (me included), usually ignoring the bad luck/calls that the opposition get. For example, for Wakey's 3rd try it looked very much like the player chasing down Sneyd's kick (Batchelor?) COULD be offside, and if he isn't then, unless I'm mistaken, the player lying the wrong side of the tackle on Taylor (Mason Lino) who gets the ball from Batchelor's charge-down IS definitely offside and can't get involved in the next play (and can't be played onside). Thus the try should not have been awarded.

So we all cite examples of being hard done by, without the balance of things that went our way.


No worries, I guess it highlights the issues in officiating we have when both sets of fans can pick so many faults for their respective teams.

I respect the refs have a tough job but I think they need more help and the officiating structure needs looking at.
Top six 2005 - Trinity.
Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 69 guests

Quick Reply



Subject:
Message:

   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.

Return to Hull FC - blackandwhites.co.uk


POSTSONLINEMEMBERSRECORDTEAM
5,187,91872878,6789,567LOGIN
LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.
When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
YOU HAVE RL CHAT OFF
RLFANS Match Centre
Mon 2nd Aug
NRL RND: 20 Canterbury6-34Gold Coast
NRL RND: 20 Cronulla22-40Manly
SL RND: 17 Castleford16-34Huddersfield
SL RND: 17 Hull FC10-42St.Helens
SL RND: 17 Hull KR16-23Catalans
Sun 1st Aug
NRL RND: 20 St.George14-50Souths
NRL RND: 20 Newcastle34-24Canberra
NRL RND: 20 Melbourne37-10Penrith
CH RND: 15 Dewsbury18-22Swinton
CH RND: 15 Featherstone6-23Toulouse
CH RND: 15 Halifax24-21Bradford
CH RND: 15 Newcastle14-20Whitehaven
CH RND: 15 Oldham20-30LondonB
CH RND: 15 Widnes16-34Batley
L1 RND: 12 Doncaster24-46Hunslet
L1 RND: 12 Crusaders72-4West Wales
L1 RND: 12 Rochdale20-42Keighley
SL RND: 17 Wigan50-6Leigh
SL RND: 17 Leeds26-27Warrington
Sat 31st Jul
L1 RND: 12 LondonS12-14Coventry
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
National Rugby League 2021 ROUND : 20
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Melbourne 19 689 224 465 34
Penrith 19 521 228 293 32
Souths 19 613 382 231 32
Parramatta 19 484 295 189 26
Sydney 19 509 343 166 26
Manly 19 569 400 169 24
Gold Coast 19 460 484 -24 16
Cronulla 19 392 458 -66 16
 
Canberra 19 383 465 -82 16
St.George 19 382 464 -82 16
Newcastle 19 325 472 -147 16
NZ Warriors 19 373 502 -129 12
Wests 19 412 564 -152 12
NQL Cowboys 19 358 584 -226 12
Brisbane 19 331 578 -247 10
Canterbury 19 242 600 -358 4
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Super League XXVI ROUND : 17
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Catalans 16 482 262 220 30 183.97 93.75
St.Helens 13 328 106 222 22 309.43 84.62
Warrington 15 456 247 209 23 184.62 76.67
Wigan 17 305 295 10 22 103.39 64.71
Hull FC 14 308 279 29 15 110.39 53.57
Leeds 16 380 290 90 16 131.03 50
 
Hull KR 12 287 267 20 12 107.49 50
Castleford 15 267 388 -121 12 68.81 40
Huddersfield 16 278 334 -56 10 83.23 31.25
Salford 14 237 405 -168 8 58.52 28.57
Wakefield 16 279 394 -115 8 70.81 25
Leigh 14 218 558 -340 0 39.07 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Championship 2021 ROUND : 16
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Toulouse 10 456 94 362 20 485.11 100
Featherstone 14 579 189 390 24 306.35 92.86
Halifax 15 422 220 202 22 191.82 73.33
LondonB 14 404 357 47 17 113.17 67.86
Batley 15 404 302 102 20 133.77 66.67
Bradford 14 375 339 36 18 110.62 64.29
 
Whitehaven 15 297 410 -113 13 72.44 43.33
Widnes 14 323 378 -55 11 85.45 39.29
Sheffield 14 313 413 -100 11 75.79 39.29
Newcastle 14 298 420 -122 11 70.95 39.29
York 14 345 327 18 10 105.50 35.71
Dewsbury 14 215 401 -186 9 53.62 32.14
Oldham 14 210 500 -290 4 42 14.29
Swinton 15 256 547 -291 2 46.80 6.67
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred League One 2021 ROUND : 13
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Barrow 11 382 162 220 19 235.80 86.36
Workington 9 334 158 176 15 211.39 83.33
Doncaster 11 348 251 97 15 138.65 68.18
Crusaders 11 350 322 28 12 108.70 54.55
Keighley 12 410 279 131 13 146.95 54.17
Hunslet 12 334 301 33 11 110.96 45.83
 
Coventry 11 258 264 -6 10 97.73 45.45
Rochdale 11 299 322 -23 10 92.86 45.45
LondonS 12 192 350 -158 7 54.86 29.17
West Wales 12 126 586 -460 0 21.50 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Womens Super League 2021 ROUND : 9
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
LeedsW 7 364 38 326 14 957.89 100
St.HelensW 7 370 36 334 12 1,027.78 85.71
WiganW 6 222 64 158 10 346.88 83.33
YorkW 6 186 102 84 8 182.35 66.67
CastlefordW 6 166 96 70 8 172.92 66.67
BradfordW 8 158 264 -106 6 59.85 37.50
 
Hudds W 7 104 288 -184 4 36.11 28.57
Wire W 8 150 334 -184 4 44.91 25
FeatherstoneW 8 122 338 -216 4 36.09 25
WakefieldW 7 50 332 -282 0 15.06 0
RLFANS Recent Posts




X