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: 3472
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: 5840
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: 3472
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: 3472
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: ComeOnYouUll, Dave K., FoD FC Army, Google Adsense [Bot], Hasbag, Irregular Hoops, K-Diddy, Magic Superbeetle, old faith full, peterr8186, Rubyred1, scarrie, spegs, themightynortherner and 246 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
5,186,1682,16078,6789,567LOGIN
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
Fri 30th Jul
NRL
LIVE
Wests16-18NZ Warriors
NRL
LIVE
Brisbane37-18NQL Cowboys
Thu 29th Jul
NRL RND: 20 Sydney28-0Parramatta
SLRND: 16 Catalans40-20Wakefield
SL RND: 16 Hull FC12-22Leeds
Wed 28th Jul
SL RND: 16 Warrington21-8Wigan
Sun 25th Jul
CH RND: 14 Sheffield28-40Halifax
CH RND: 14 Batley42-12Newcastle
CH RND: 14 Bradford30-36Featherstone
CH RND: 14 Whitehaven28-24Oldham
CH RND: 14 York46-10Swinton
L1 RND: 11 Barrow40-12Coventry
L1 RND: 11 Hunslet20-20Keighley
NRL RND: 19 St.George10-32Gold Coast
NRL RND: 19 Canterbury24-44Cronulla
Sat 24th Jul
NRL RND: 19 Souths60-22NZ Warriors
NRL RND: 19 Manly44-24Wests
NRL RND: 19 Penrith18-12Brisbane
L1 RND: 12 LondonS46-30West Wales
SL RND: 13 Catalans32-30Hull KR
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
National Rugby League 2021 ROUND : 18
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Melbourne 17 632 198 434 30
Penrith 17 493 179 314 30
Souths 17 503 346 157 28
Parramatta 17 474 255 219 26
Sydney 17 453 335 118 22
Manly 17 485 354 131 20
St.George 17 358 382 -24 16
Cronulla 17 326 394 -68 14
 
Canberra 17 347 421 -74 14
Newcastle 17 283 420 -137 14
Gold Coast 17 394 468 -74 12
Wests 17 372 502 -130 12
NQL Cowboys 17 324 527 -203 12
NZ Warriors 17 333 426 -93 10
Brisbane 17 282 542 -260 8
Canterbury 17 212 522 -310 4
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Super League XXVI ROUND : 16
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Catalans 15 459 246 213 28 186.59 93.33
St.Helens 12 286 96 190 20 297.92 83.33
Warrington 14 429 221 208 21 194.12 75
Wigan 16 255 289 -34 20 88.24 62.50
Hull FC 13 298 237 61 15 125.74 57.69
Hull KR 11 271 244 27 12 111.07 54.55
 
Leeds 15 354 263 91 16 134.60 53.33
Castleford 14 251 354 -103 12 70.90 42.86
Salford 14 237 405 -168 8 58.52 28.57
Huddersfield 15 244 318 -74 8 76.73 26.67
Wakefield 16 279 394 -115 8 70.81 25
Leigh 13 212 508 -296 0 41.73 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Championship 2021 ROUND : 14
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Toulouse 9 433 88 345 18 492.05 100
Featherstone 13 573 166 407 26 345.18 100
Halifax 14 398 199 199 20 200 71.43
Bradford 13 354 315 39 18 112.38 69.23
LondonB 13 374 337 37 17 110.98 65.38
Batley 14 370 286 84 18 129.37 64.29
 
Widnes 13 307 344 -37 11 89.24 42.31
Newcastle 13 284 400 -116 11 71 42.31
Sheffield 14 313 413 -100 11 75.79 39.29
Whitehaven 14 277 396 -119 11 69.95 39.29
York 14 345 327 18 10 105.50 35.71
Dewsbury 13 197 379 -182 9 51.98 34.62
Oldham 13 190 470 -280 4 40.43 15.38
Swinton 14 234 529 -295 0 44.23 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred League One 2021 ROUND : 10
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Barrow 10 342 150 192 17 228 85
Workington 9 334 158 176 15 211.39 83.33
Doncaster 9 308 189 119 14 162.96 77.78
Keighley 10 348 239 109 10 145.61 50
Rochdale 10 279 280 -1 10 99.64 50
Crusaders 10 278 318 -40 10 87.42 50
 
Coventry 8 204 240 -36 8 85 50
Hunslet 10 268 257 11 8 104.28 40
LondonS 8 154 292 -138 2 52.74 12.50
West Wales 10 122 514 -392 0 23.74 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