it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
It was embarrassing to watch. Annesly make a big point of going through the letter of the rule that they claim was breached and Annesyly keep harping on teh word GRIP. He didnt REGRIP the ball before it hit the ground, ignoring the fact that the rule specifically says that he has to "catch, hold or grip" the ball before it hits the ground. Annesly keeps stating he didnt reGRIP it but he is clearly holding it.
Based on Anneslys interpretation (that he wasnt gripping it) there will never be another one handed try scored again.
What happens when you score from a grubber? There is not grip there?
Worst case Api has hold of the ball before it reaches the ground. That is all that is required for it to be a TRY. The bunker and Annesley are wrong.it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
personally I believe it should have been a try however as soon as I saw a replay of it I knew it was going to be a no try.
The ball comes away from his hand which unfortunately means he’s lost control of it.
I haven’t heard the audio you are referring to and haven’t seen footage of his thumb still on the ball. However, the offical who had to make the decision decided that he didn’t have control of the ball as per above.
It’s been a rule for a while now that placing your hand on top of the ball while it’s heading to the ground does not count as regaining control.
people complain about the rules being too complicated and they need to be more black and white. However when the rules are applied in a black and white fashion they are upset and want to introduce grey areas.
but he doesn’t have hold of it. He has his hand laying on top of it.
they changed the rule 4 or 5 seasons ago that you needed to regain control and not just push it to the ground.
I understand the argument you are making but can see exactly why the bunker went the way they did.
I actually think it is just having them apply some common sense. If that gets awarded a try, I cannot imagine anyone saying that it was the wrong call.
Agreed I don’t think anyone would have complained if it was given as a try.
problem with common sense is it’s viewed different by different people.
it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
It was embarrassing to watch. Annesly make a big point of going through the letter of the rule that they claim was breached and Annesyly keep harping on teh word GRIP. He didnt REGRIP the ball before it hit the ground, ignoring the fact that the rule specifically says that he has to "catch, hold or grip" the ball before it hits the ground. Annesly keeps stating he didnt reGRIP it but he is clearly holding it.
Based on Anneslys interpretation (that he wasnt gripping it) there will never be another one handed try scored again.
What happens when you score from a grubber? There is not grip there?
there is slightly different rules for kicks and lost balls.
with a kick you can ground it so long as you hand never leaves the ball. But if it does same rules apply ie no try
Worst case Api has hold of the ball before it reaches the ground. That is all that is required for it to be a TRY. The bunker and Annesley are wrong.it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
personally I believe it should have been a try however as soon as I saw a replay of it I knew it was going to be a no try.
The ball comes away from his hand which unfortunately means he’s lost control of it.
I haven’t heard the audio you are referring to and haven’t seen footage of his thumb still on the ball. However, the offical who had to make the decision decided that he didn’t have control of the ball as per above.
It’s been a rule for a while now that placing your hand on top of the ball while it’s heading to the ground does not count as regaining control.
people complain about the rules being too complicated and they need to be more black and white. However when the rules are applied in a black and white fashion they are upset and want to introduce grey areas.
but he doesn’t have hold of it. He has his hand laying on top of it.
they changed the rule 4 or 5 seasons ago that you needed to regain control and not just push it to the ground.
I understand the argument you are making but can see exactly why the bunker went the way they did.
I don't think they changed the rule, just the interpretation of the rule. This interpretation of the rule is just dumb though. If you have downward pressure when the ball hits the ground, it should be a try. Black and white and it takes away this nonsense.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
It was embarrassing to watch. Annesly make a big point of going through the letter of the rule that they claim was breached and Annesyly keep harping on teh word GRIP. He didnt REGRIP the ball before it hit the ground, ignoring the fact that the rule specifically says that he has to "catch, hold or grip" the ball before it hits the ground. Annesly keeps stating he didnt reGRIP it but he is clearly holding it.
Based on Anneslys interpretation (that he wasnt gripping it) there will never be another one handed try scored again.
What happens when you score from a grubber? There is not grip there?
That has a different interpretation currently, the interpretation used to deny Api's try is only used if you are holding the ball and the ball comes away from your hand trying to put it down. Overcomplicating something that should be simple.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
personally I believe it should have been a try however as soon as I saw a replay of it I knew it was going to be a no try.
So did I but only because the bunker can always be relied on to screw it up when it disadvantages us.
The ball comes away from his hand which unfortunately means he’s lost control of it.
It means he has momentarily lost control of it however as clearly written in the rule book if he manages to hold the ball before it hits the ground, its a try. he is holding the ball for most of the travel to the ground and definitely before it hits the ground.
Question for you. go and watch it again. Do you think that Api could have grounded the ball short of the line if he wanted to? I do...he had control of the ball, he was holding it.
I haven’t heard the audio you are referring to and haven’t seen footage of his thumb still on the ball. However, the offical who had to make the decision decided that he didn’t have control of the ball as per above.
You should go and watch the Annesley video, they have the audio of the deliberations in the bunker. There are two people discussing it. One clearly says "but does he still have his thumb on the ball?" and the other overrules. You also see both camera angles. The other camera angle you never see actual seperation and on the angle we did see on the TV you cant see his thumb.
It’s been a rule for a while now that placing your hand on top of the ball while it’s heading to the ground does not count as regaining control.
The rule clearly says that its a try if after losing control of the ball the player "catches, holds or grips the ball". Api is holding the ball. if that is not control, there will never be another one handed try again.
people complain about the rules being too complicated and they need to be more black and white. However when the rules are applied in a black and white fashion they are upset and want to introduce grey areas.
Api is holding the ball. Its a try. If that is not holding the ball, there will never be another one handed try again.
Firstly I believe he has some part of his hand in contact with the ball the whole time, however this does not mean he didnt lose "control" as he clearly did, however the fact it was awarded a try you have to find a glaringly obvious valid reason to not award it...based on what I have seen you cannot say without a doubt that he has not re gripped the ball, I can hold a ball with my hand on top in full control...I am 6 foot 3 and have fairly large hands, however who's to say Api's does not have the same. As an earlier poster said, if you disallow that try than almost every one handed try with downward pressure should be disallowed...including the 2 staines try's. Its a stupid rule as its not a knock on because the ball never hits the ground or someone else before his hand is back in contact with it. Annesley is too arrogant to agree we have been screwed over 2 weeks in a row. Let him have this one as I am sure he will be in the ear of the refs officiating our games over the next few weeks (I hope).Worst case Api has hold of the ball before it reaches the ground. That is all that is required for it to be a TRY. The bunker and Annesley are wrong.it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
personally I believe it should have been a try however as soon as I saw a replay of it I knew it was going to be a no try.
The ball comes away from his hand which unfortunately means he’s lost control of it.
I haven’t heard the audio you are referring to and haven’t seen footage of his thumb still on the ball. However, the offical who had to make the decision decided that he didn’t have control of the ball as per above.
It’s been a rule for a while now that placing your hand on top of the ball while it’s heading to the ground does not count as regaining control.
people complain about the rules being too complicated and they need to be more black and white. However when the rules are applied in a black and white fashion they are upset and want to introduce grey areas.
but he doesn’t have hold of it. He has his hand laying on top of it.
they changed the rule 4 or 5 seasons ago that you needed to regain control and not just push it to the ground.
I understand the argument you are making but can see exactly why the bunker went the way they did.
I actually think it is just having them apply some common sense. If that gets awarded a try, I cannot imagine anyone saying that it was the wrong call.
Worst case Api has hold of the ball before it reaches the ground. That is all that is required for it to be a TRY. The bunker and Annesley are wrong.it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
personally I believe it should have been a try however as soon as I saw a replay of it I knew it was going to be a no try.
The ball comes away from his hand which unfortunately means he’s lost control of it.
I haven’t heard the audio you are referring to and haven’t seen footage of his thumb still on the ball. However, the offical who had to make the decision decided that he didn’t have control of the ball as per above.
It’s been a rule for a while now that placing your hand on top of the ball while it’s heading to the ground does not count as regaining control.
people complain about the rules being too complicated and they need to be more black and white. However when the rules are applied in a black and white fashion they are upset and want to introduce grey areas.
but he doesn’t have hold of it. He has his hand laying on top of it.
they changed the rule 4 or 5 seasons ago that you needed to regain control and not just push it to the ground.
I understand the argument you are making but can see exactly why the bunker went the way they did.
I don't think they changed the rule, just the interpretation of the rule. This interpretation of the rule is just dumb though. If you have downward pressure when the ball hits the ground, it should be a try. Black and white and it takes away this nonsense.
you are probably right about the interpretation. I do remember when the change occurred.
agree downward pressure should be downward pressure. They have just gone black and white the other way
@tiger5150 I understand most of your points and agree to an extend however when you say there will never be another one handed try you are missing the point that he lost the ball for a short period and basically has to catch it again not just get his hand on top.
Api scored, that’s the bottom line.it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
personally I believe it should have been a try however as soon as I saw a replay of it I knew it was going to be a no try.
So did I but only because the bunker can always be relied on to screw it up when it disadvantages us.
The ball comes away from his hand which unfortunately means he’s lost control of it.
It means he has momentarily lost control of it however as clearly written in the rule book if he manages to hold the ball before it hits the ground, its a try. he is holding the ball for most of the travel to the ground and definitely before it hits the ground.
Question for you. go and watch it again. Do you think that Api could have grounded the ball short of the line if he wanted to? I do...he had control of the ball, he was holding it.
I haven’t heard the audio you are referring to and haven’t seen footage of his thumb still on the ball. However, the offical who had to make the decision decided that he didn’t have control of the ball as per above.
You should go and watch the Annesley video, they have the audio of the deliberations in the bunker. There are two people discussing it. One clearly says "but does he still have his thumb on the ball?" and the other overrules. You also see both camera angles. The other camera angle you never see actual seperation and on the angle we did see on the TV you cant see his thumb.
It’s been a rule for a while now that placing your hand on top of the ball while it’s heading to the ground does not count as regaining control.
The rule clearly says that its a try if after losing control of the ball the player "catches, holds or grips the ball". Api is holding the ball. if that is not control, there will never be another one handed try again.
people complain about the rules being too complicated and they need to be more black and white. However when the rules are applied in a black and white fashion they are upset and want to introduce grey areas.
Api is holding the ball. Its a try. If that is not holding the ball, there will never be another one handed try again.
I doubt that very much. Annesley is part of the problem.Let him have this one as I am sure he will be in the ear of the refs officiating our games over the next few weeks (I hope).
Api scored, that’s the bottom line.it wasn’t even technically correct.Just watched the Annesley presser and him trying to justify why the bunker was right. Fair dinking these guys need to go back and study physics, they clearly have no idea of what they are talking about. Again there needs to be an independent investigation into the bunker as it is corrupt to the core. It’s just getting silly now.
I feel it was technically the right call. The ball does coming away if only briefly. Unfortunately you do have to adjudicate to the letter of the law otherwise things get very murky. I don’t think anyone would have said anything if it was given as a try but the rules are the rules.
1. One of the officials in the background can be clearly heard saying he still has a thumb on it.
2. He still has control of the ball between his palm and wrist.
3. Even if you think he did lose control, I don’t, he has full control of the ball well before it is forced to the ground for a TRY.The bunker is just plain wrong and so is Annesley. Annesley is part of the problem and needs to be sacked
personally I believe it should have been a try however as soon as I saw a replay of it I knew it was going to be a no try.
So did I but only because the bunker can always be relied on to screw it up when it disadvantages us.
The ball comes away from his hand which unfortunately means he’s lost control of it.
It means he has momentarily lost control of it however as clearly written in the rule book if he manages to hold the ball before it hits the ground, its a try. he is holding the ball for most of the travel to the ground and definitely before it hits the ground.
Question for you. go and watch it again. Do you think that Api could have grounded the ball short of the line if he wanted to? I do...he had control of the ball, he was holding it.
I haven’t heard the audio you are referring to and haven’t seen footage of his thumb still on the ball. However, the offical who had to make the decision decided that he didn’t have control of the ball as per above.
You should go and watch the Annesley video, they have the audio of the deliberations in the bunker. There are two people discussing it. One clearly says "but does he still have his thumb on the ball?" and the other overrules. You also see both camera angles. The other camera angle you never see actual seperation and on the angle we did see on the TV you cant see his thumb.
It’s been a rule for a while now that placing your hand on top of the ball while it’s heading to the ground does not count as regaining control.
The rule clearly says that its a try if after losing control of the ball the player "catches, holds or grips the ball". Api is holding the ball. if that is not control, there will never be another one handed try again.
people complain about the rules being too complicated and they need to be more black and white. However when the rules are applied in a black and white fashion they are upset and want to introduce grey areas.
Api is holding the ball. Its a try. If that is not holding the ball, there will never be another one handed try again.
because Stone Cold said so.
@tiger5150 I understand most of your points and agree to an extend however when you say there will never be another one handed try you are missing the point that he lost the ball for a short period and basically has to catch it again not just get his hand on top.
No he doesnt. The rule is very clear. He can catch it, grip it, or hold it. He was holding it. he could have pulled it short of the line if he wanted.
Take your point to its ultimate conclusion....when Staines scored his try one handed and there was no separation, was he holding the ball all the way to the ground? If he is holding the ball, why isnt Api?
@tiger5150 I understand most of your points and agree to an extend however when you say there will never be another one handed try you are missing the point that he lost the ball for a short period and basically has to catch it again not just get his hand on top.
No he doesnt. The rule is very clear. He can catch it, grip it, or hold it. He was holding it. he could have pulled it short of the line if he wanted.
Take your point to its ultimate conclusion....when Staines scored his try one handed and there was no separation, was he holding the ball all the way to the ground? If he is holding the ball, why isnt Api?
The difference is that Charlie caught the ball and it never left his hand. Api had the ball it came away from his hand (yes there is debate around that but that’s what they ruled) and didn’t catch it again. His hand comes back on top of the ball which isn’t classed as regaining control.
personally I believe that incidences like the Api one should be awarded however my understanding is technically its correct to say no try. Whether that’s the right interpretation or not is another discussion.
@tiger5150 I understand most of your points and agree to an extend however when you say there will never be another one handed try you are missing the point that he lost the ball for a short period and basically has to catch it again not just get his hand on top.
No he doesnt. The rule is very clear. He can catch it, grip it, or hold it. He was holding it. he could have pulled it short of the line if he wanted.
Take your point to its ultimate conclusion....when Staines scored his try one handed and there was no separation, was he holding the ball all the way to the ground? If he is holding the ball, why isnt Api?
The difference is that Charlie caught the ball and it never left his hand. Api had the ball it came away from his hand (yes there is debate around that but that’s what they ruled) and didn’t catch it again. His hand comes back on top of the ball which isn’t classed as regaining control.
i understand that the difference is that it came away from his hand, however based on Annesleys description of the interpretation of the law and the actual law, it doesnt matter. It just matters whether he caught, gripped or held the ball again before grounding. If Charlie was holding the ball, as it went to the ground (and he was), Api was also holding the ball and therefore its a try....or as Ive said before, if that is not holding the ball, there can never be another one handed try again.
personally I believe that incidences like the Api one should be awarded however my understanding is technically its correct to say no try. Whether that’s the right interpretation or not is another discussion.
On Annesleys description of the interpretation and on the technical description of the law. Its wrong. It was a try.
