Western Force demolish the Lions: 55-14

[robyn <3]

as much as i lOVE cam Shepherd and wanted him 2 get a hat trick to make him the highest try scorer in the competion i do think that his back foot touched the line

I concur, his foot id go into touch with the Lions player. Would have been lovely if it was a try though.

[Little Ox]

Force win even made the news in Melbourne...

[Egan]

Will be at the last home game of the year!

And then the finals caimpaign if we get in!

COME ON FORCE!

[Fullback]

Go Force! You played like champions

The downside was the ref, honestly it was a shocking call by him. So many things he let go or he missed, more so by the Lions they were playing really dirty last night.

The TMO did a pretty good job in hindsight.

I suppose the bottom line is the Force is still in with a chance for the finals and have really helped their chances with their new for and against tally.

Keep it going guys!

[es1988]

shep's was definatley a try. that was bollocks.

was a great game though.
i'll take wins like that anyday.

hoping that boof and stanford are ok.
i hope that the shoulder complaints of pocock and wykes don't amount to anything.

Sheps was clearly not a try, his back foot was dragged onto the line. Whalleys wasnt either but Im not complaining

[as77221]

Sheps was in...

Just before the second pic his foot was dragged onto the line by the lions player before he pulled his foot free and ran for the line. Watch the footage again and you will see his back foot is definately on the line.

[GIGS20]

I still think it's a debatable one.....you'd have to do with benefit of the doubt, since it's not clear either way (too much shadow in the shot to clearly see whether it's boot or tackler that's touching the line)

Ecky, is there an allowance for benefit of the doubt in law? Does it go to the defence or the attack?

[jargan83]

Benefit of the Doubt goes with the attacking side in Rugby League, not really a fan of it either

[GIGS20]

Don't care, if there's no benefit of the doubt, then it's no try because video is inconclusive!

[jargan83]

so your saying you would like to see Benefit of the Doubt tries awarded?

In Rugby League, benefit of the doubt occurs when the video replay is not conclusive
Posted via Mobile Device

[Burgs]

And here is me thinking the TMO could only adjudicate within the in goal area...
I'm sure that was the original law?

[Darren]

I guess it depends on teh question asked.

"Is there any reason I can not award the try" could have an opposite resuilt to "Try or No Try"

[Burgs]

Is that to my question specifically or just a general statement Coach?

The very first use of the TMO was only in goal and had to be a specific request.
That is, the Ref had to ask what he wanted looked at eg. "Can you check grounding". That meant TMO could only check grounding, even if say he could plainly see that the player's foot was over the deadball line.
That is why it evolved to the Ref cop out (but "usually" more accurate) "Is there any reason I cannot award the Try?"
To my knowledge though it still was restricted to the in goal area.
That was a reason the infamous Subiaco Crusaders no Try was such a mess as he recomended a lineout which wasn't an option for him to give.

Looking forward to a ref or researcher to set it all straight...

[hertryk]

What goes around comes around...for the two tries brought back against the Hurricanes...Think where we'd be if the tries IN THAT GAME were rightfully awarded..

---------- Post added at 15:48 ---------- Previous post was at 15:46 ----------

Will be at the last home game of the year!

And then the finals caimpaign if we get in!

COME ON FORCE!

DON'T EVEN THINK "IF" LET ALONE PUT IT ON PAPER...
BELIEVE....JUST FIRMLY BELIEVE...!!!