NRL Fantasy 2019 Part 85

Mighty Fishes wrote:

I think he grounded it when he grounded it

I'm a Rabbits man but I just can't see where you are coming from mate. He lost the ball and Croker planted it.

Krump wrote:
Which one?

There’s plenty of rabbits supporters (gg guys), but only one rabbit 

Mighty Fishes wrote:

I think he grounded it when he grounded it

Then i don't know what you expect him to say to put your mind at ease, if it's mentioned he's just going to point to a screenshot of the section of the rulebook (Page 16) which i've already posted, which states:

"Grounding the Ball in own In Goal

For the ball to be deemed dead the player in possession must intentionally ground the ball in his
own in-goal."

if you want to argue the ball was intentionally grounded, despite immediately after, the player jumping up and diving for the field of play, knock yourself out, I guess.

surmo13 wrote:

Justification for what? It was called literally as it appears in the rulebook.

Ref blaming hasn't gotten to the point where we now get angry at officials for making any decision at all, even if its correct.

surmo13 wrote:

Then i don't know what you expect him to say to put your mind at ease, if it's mentioned he's just going to point to a screenshot of the section of the rulebook (Page 16) which i've already posted, which states:

"Grounding the Ball in own In Goal

For the ball to be deemed dead the player in possession must intentionally ground the ball in his
own in-goal."

if you want to argue the ball was intentionally grounded, despite immediately after, the player jumping up and diving for the field of play, knock yourself out, I guess.

Fair call. I guess my gripe is with the wording of intentional only in affect for certain things. The rule book also clearly states you must intentionally kick the ball but we see countless times they dont take intention into consideration.

Mighty Fishes wrote:

Fair call. I guess my gripe is with the wording of intentional only in affect for certain things. The rule book also clearly states you must intentionally kick the ball but we see countless times they dont take intention into consideration.

I see where you're coming from, mate. There is so much ambiguity in the rules that these calls can easily go either way. It's about time we have some definitive rulings because I'm sick of this 'we'll cross that bridge when we come to it' bullshit.

Mighty Fishes wrote:

Fair call. I guess my gripe is with the wording of intentional only in affect for certain things. The rule book also clearly states you must intentionally kick the ball but we see countless times they dont take intention into consideration.

Ha! Your avatar every time gets me.

@ nrl physio - Friend & Vunivalu ruled out & won't play

that strip call was a dud, no way she was already held

lol, just tuned in to 9 and didn't realize i was watching the Brisbane Riverfire, thought it was part of the build-up to the game and was trying to figure out why Sydney was blowing its load over a semi-final

first tackle and we've gone 12 on 12

Great pick of SST for fantasy, quickest sinbin since Morley surely

Consistent from last week at least with the bins

Well - that's an interesting start to the game

did something get in the water at the start of the finals? discipline from that perspective has been fine all season, just 'handbags at ten paces' stuff, now all the players wanna get their punch on

wow, that looked an awful lot like Tupou's palm was pointed towards the dead ball line when the ball came free.

Can you imagine a team with half a dozen Brandon Smiths in it

Storm seem to be getting a few 50/50s against them .... or is it me?

Storm getting a taste of their own medicine here, getting nothing as far as calls go.

NRL wanting Roosters in the GF I see.