Page 2 of 2
Re: Sinfields Conversion
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 9:27 pm
by Kittwazzer
cpwigan wrote:I thought he missed but the TJs seemed very certain and if both think so I presume it went over. Mind you should never have been a try. Ben Thaler worrys me.
Watched it again and he definitely missed. OK, we won by 20 so it didn't matter but this season, nearly all our defeats have been by 1 or 2 points. This should be brought up to the RFL and the final score should be amended. No need to mention the controversial try but it needs to be 'on record'.
With a ref, 2 Touch Judges and a Video Ref, this sort of thing is totally unforgivable!
And it is more ammunition to the round ball types that ours is a Mickey Mouse game!
Re: Sinfields Conversion
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 9:30 pm
by cpwigan
If it did miss then that is very worrying given the TJs seemed convinced. Thaler scared me as Video Referee.
Re: Sinfields Conversion
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 9:34 pm
by michael inch stoke
Kittwazzer wrote:cpwigan wrote:I thought he missed but the TJs seemed very certain and if both think so I presume it went over. Mind you should never have been a try. Ben Thaler worrys me.
Watched it again and he definitely missed. OK, we won by 20 so it didn't matter but this season, nearly all our defeats have been by 1 or 2 points. This should be brought up to the RFL and the final score should be amended. No need to mention the controversial try but it needs to be 'on record'.
With a ref, 2 Touch Judges and a Video Ref, this sort of thing is totally unforgivable!
And it is more ammunition to the round ball types that ours is a Mickey Mouse game!
Totally agree, two incorrect decisions could have been very costly to us. Thankfully it didnt :lol1:
Re: Sinfields Conversion
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 9:39 pm
by cumbria_warrior
it was not a miss just rechecked it on pc with frame by frame