@lorenzo the big thing with the draw is that we have the bye in the first and last round.
I can cop someone has to be in those rounds but no team should have both in one season. I’m unsure how this got passed everyone before it was released.
We play Parra last round.
sorry my mistake. I had in my head we had a bye the last round but it’s the second last year. Still not cool
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
the Sami one shouldn’t be a try imo however he keeps his finger tip on the ball. They rule that (rightly or wrongly) as a try because it hasn’t come all the way off.
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
the Sami one shouldn’t be a try imo however he keeps his finger tip on the ball. They rule that (rightly or wrongly) as a try because it hasn’t come all the way off.
Is he holding or gripping it? Certainly didnt have control.
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
the Sami one shouldn’t be a try imo however he keeps his finger tip on the ball. They rule that (rightly or wrongly) as a try because it hasn’t come all the way off.
Is he holding or gripping it? Certainly didnt have control.
but he didn’t completely lose it as his finger was still on it. The situations aren’t the same.
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
the Sami one shouldn’t be a try imo however he keeps his finger tip on the ball. They rule that (rightly or wrongly) as a try because it hasn’t come all the way off.
Is he holding or gripping it? Certainly didnt have control.
but he didn’t completely lose it as his finger was still on it. The situations aren’t the same.
Ill tell you one thing that is the same......complete consistent inconsistency and incompetence. Its ridiculous and I am completely over it. Apis try was a try every day of the week, but the"pub test" and by the letter of the rules. Sami's try was not a try, even Sami indicated it wasnt a try....
Not sure why you want to fight to the death to defend the the incompetence of these clown masquerading as professional officials, but Ill leave you to it. Im over it.
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
the Sami one shouldn’t be a try imo however he keeps his finger tip on the ball. They rule that (rightly or wrongly) as a try because it hasn’t come all the way off.
Is he holding or gripping it? Certainly didnt have control.
but he didn’t completely lose it as his finger was still on it. The situations aren’t the same.
Ill tell you one thing that is the same......complete consistent inconsistency and incompetence. Its ridiculous and I am completely over it. Apis try was a try every day of the week, but the"pub test" and by the letter of the rules. Sami's try was not a try, even Sami indicated it wasnt a try....
Not sure why you want to fight to the death to defend the the incompetence of these clown masquerading as professional officials, but Ill leave you to it. Im over it.
You’re the one trying to fight to the death even going so far as to bring up another try that isn’t the same and saying it is.
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
the Sami one shouldn’t be a try imo however he keeps his finger tip on the ball. They rule that (rightly or wrongly) as a try because it hasn’t come all the way off.
Is he holding or gripping it? Certainly didnt have control.
but he didn’t completely lose it as his finger was still on it. The situations aren’t the same.
Ill tell you one thing that is the same......complete consistent inconsistency and incompetence. Its ridiculous and I am completely over it. Apis try was a try every day of the week, but the"pub test" and by the letter of the rules. Sami's try was not a try, even Sami indicated it wasnt a try....
Not sure why you want to fight to the death to defend the the incompetence of these clown masquerading as professional officials, but Ill leave you to it. Im over it.
You’re the one trying to fight to the death even going so far as to bring up another try that isn’t the same and saying it is.
No Im sure you are right. Both are examples of stellar officiating. Nothing to see here, nothing to worry about.
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
the Sami one shouldn’t be a try imo however he keeps his finger tip on the ball. They rule that (rightly or wrongly) as a try because it hasn’t come all the way off.
Is he holding or gripping it? Certainly didnt have control.
but he didn’t completely lose it as his finger was still on it. The situations aren’t the same.
Ill tell you one thing that is the same......complete consistent inconsistency and incompetence. Its ridiculous and I am completely over it. Apis try was a try every day of the week, but the"pub test" and by the letter of the rules. Sami's try was not a try, even Sami indicated it wasnt a try....
Not sure why you want to fight to the death to defend the the incompetence of these clown masquerading as professional officials, but Ill leave you to it. Im over it.
You’re the one trying to fight to the death even going so far as to bring up another try that isn’t the same and saying it is.
No Im sure you are right. Both are examples of stellar officiating. Nothing to see here, nothing to worry about.
I never said it was stellar officiating. I’ve said the Api one should be a try and the Sami one not. However that’s not how the rules are interpreted.
If fingers come all the way off the ball you have to gain complete control.
if a finger tip stays on the ball they give it.
just because I understand the rule/interpretation doesn’t mean I agree with them.
1) there was separation
2) the law as described by Annesley says you need to regain control which is discuss as being “grip”
This is simply not right. The law explicitly says "catch, hold, or grip".
and they have viewed the situation as Api not doing any of those 3 things. They are saying his hand caught up with the ball only
Put simply, I think this is wrong. plain and simple I believe the bunker made an error and the Annesley explanation relies on the "grip" explanation to obfuscate for their error.
I’ve watched the Annesley think and I thought he was reasonably clear
We do you think he repeatedly used the word "Grip" despite the fact the rule says "catch, hold or grip"? What do you think his reasoning was?
What do you think Annesley meant when he said that "that has been a try forever in the past and will be again in the future?"
Annesley knows its a try and clung onto the grip thing to justify the decision.
disagree
he was explaining that he had to grip the because he could catch or hold the ball in that situation.
you’re only partially quoting him he said “people will say that has been a try…..” before explaining why the rule changed a few seasons ago.
He generally admits when they get it wrong re:the non sin bin the week before.
Didnt take long.....watch Sami try for Titans v Storm...its a complete joke.
the Sami one shouldn’t be a try imo however he keeps his finger tip on the ball. They rule that (rightly or wrongly) as a try because it hasn’t come all the way off.
Is he holding or gripping it? Certainly didnt have control.
but he didn’t completely lose it as his finger was still on it. The situations aren’t the same.
Ill tell you one thing that is the same......complete consistent inconsistency and incompetence. Its ridiculous and I am completely over it. Apis try was a try every day of the week, but the"pub test" and by the letter of the rules. Sami's try was not a try, even Sami indicated it wasnt a try....
Not sure why you want to fight to the death to defend the the incompetence of these clown masquerading as professional officials, but Ill leave you to it. Im over it.
You’re the one trying to fight to the death even going so far as to bring up another try that isn’t the same and saying it is.
No Im sure you are right. Both are examples of stellar officiating. Nothing to see here, nothing to worry about.
I never said it was stellar officiating. I’ve said the Api one should be a try and the Sami one not. However that’s not how the rules are interpreted.
If fingers come all the way off the ball you have to gain complete control.
if a finger tip stays on the ball they give it.just because I understand the rule/interpretation doesn’t mean I agree with them.
Mate we all understand the reason given, its just rubbish and wrong, only given because they screwed it up.
Mate go back to the Annesley video and catch a screengrab of the frame showing Api's thumb is seperated from the ball. Even if it did....(and there is zero video evidence showing his thumb coming off the ball, the video director even says so), he clearly holds the ball again.
Mate we all understand the reason given, its just rubbish and wrong, only given because they screwed it up.
Mate go back to the Annesley video and catch a screengrab of the frame showing Api's thumb is seperated from the ball. Even if it did....(and there is zero video evidence showing his thumb coming off the ball, the video director even says so), he clearly holds the ball again.
I agree, there is no clear evidence of separation and there is downward pressure so it’s a try
^ This. Especially when it was awarded as a try on field.
