WWW.RLFANS.COM
https://rlfans.com/forums/

Benefit of Doubt
https://rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=399348		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Coventry Bears [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:20 am ]
Post subject:  Benefit of Doubt
The try tonight for benefit of doubt made me realise that this has to be one of the worse rules ever!

I thought it was a good effort by Lockers and if a there is doubt in your mind about the try then surely it cannot be given. It should only be given in you are 100% sure it is a try.

This rule needs to be scrapped because it is ridiculous, the defensive team should be rewarded for causing that doubt not punished for it!
Author:  moonlight flit [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:21 am ]
Post subject: 
Video refs are biased !
Author:  true southstander [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:27 am ]
Post subject: 
Sour grapes. It was obviously a try and you were well beaten by a far better team.
Realise the truth.
Absorb the truth.
come to terms with not making the play offs!
Author:  The Trip [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:29 am ]
Post subject: 
As a neutral Wakey fan thought you got a couple of bad calls that really influenced the game especially after half time.
Also thought nobby handled with decorum in the post match interviews.
Sorry to say the sun shines out of the rhinos rear end at present, but you have also held that position years gone by.
Here's to it shining out of our rear and yours again in the future.
Author:  Coventry Bears [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:30 am ]
Post subject: 
true southstander wrote:Sour grapes. It was obviously a try and you were well beaten by a far better team.
Realise the truth.
Absorb the truth.
come to terms with not making the play offs!


Not sour grapes at all, you were by far the better team, we were awful and deserved to lose. The fact of the matter is the rule is barmy, they have gone for us and against before.

Let me ask you, if it was obviously a try and by 'obviously' im guessin you are 100% sure, then why was it given benefit of doubt?
Author:  MattyB [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:33 am ]
Post subject: 
true southstander wrote:Sour grapes. It was obviously a try and you were well beaten by a far better team.
Realise the truth.
Absorb the truth.
come to terms with not making the play offs!



Wishful thinking.
Author:  Carneys Pint [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:45 am ]
Post subject: 
true southstander wrote:Sour grapes. It was obviously a try and you were well beaten by a far better team.
Realise the truth.
Absorb the truth.
come to terms with not making the play offs!

Best team won there's no doubting that, we had the ball for all of 10 minutes in the first half.

But the fact of the matter is that it could have been 22-18 just after half time and if it had been it would have been a very different last 30 minutes.

I'm not one for complaining about refs, video refs as it's our players who have to go out and perform and if they don't (Ie. tonights first half) then we get tonked.
Author:  tvoc [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:45 am ]
Post subject: 
Coventry Warrior! wrote:Let me ask you, if it was obviously a try and by 'obviously' im guessin you are 100% sure, then why was it given benefit of doubt?


Because although you couldn't see any part of the ball touching the grass it was reasonable to assume that it had.

Sometimes regardless of the number of cameras and video technology you still have to apply a bit of educated guesswork and rightly or wrongly the benefit of doubt does go to the attacking team.
Author:  Coventry Bears [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:49 am ]
Post subject: 
tvoc wrote:Because although you couldn't see any part of the ball touching the grass it was reasonable to assume that it had.

Sometimes regardless of the number of cameras and video technology you still have to apply a bit of educated guesswork and rightly or wrongly the benefit of doubt does go to the attacking team.


To an extent I agree with you but with all the cameras and video technology we still did not see the ball touch the grass. Tries should only been giving if they are 100% sure its a try, we cant be handing out tries willy nilly :wink:
Author:  RB [ Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:55 am ]
Post subject: 
tvoc wrote:Because although you couldn't see any part of the ball touching the grass it was reasonable to assume that it had.

Sometimes regardless of the number of cameras and video technology you still have to apply a bit of educated guesswork and rightly or wrongly the benefit of doubt does go to the attacking team.


And it's also reasonable to assume that the ball didn't touch the grass.

Peacock hardly celebrated which imo shows that he wasn't confident.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/