No conspiracy, Harry was correct when he said "he doesn’t grab him, he doesn’t push him, he bumps him with the shoulder while they’re both running for the ball which is legal". The refs boss said it wasn't a penalty.
His arm being flung sideways wasn’t enough to propel JAC into touch. There was contact by Simmonson’s shoulder but as he was lunging for the ball and couldn’t see JAC running upright he contacted JAC’s body and JAC was propelled into touch.
If Simmonson was reaching for the ball with his arm crossing JAC's path how was JAC propelled into touch? Simmonson's shoulder would have provided the momentum needed to change JAC's path.
As Greg Alexander pointed out Simonsson didn't see JAC because he was closer to the ball and had his hands reaching for it when JAC collided into him. If he was a metre away JAC would not have been forced into touch. It should have been no penalty with a 20 metre restart.
Between the two of them, Addo Carr is at fault. If you watch the video replay closely, he (AC) is not really going for the ball, he is running into Simonson, Simonson is the one trying to gain possession and is the only one following the ball and its trajectory, AC is not. He put on a nice academy award winning performance as well with that dive. That is what creates the illusion that he was being impeded, and the goons in the bunker they’re always good enough to fall for clear cut things like this as something ‘more sinister’ happening…
Terrible decision, and one that had a big impact on the game. Almost everyone agrees that Simonsson was playing the ball. At worst it was boderline, in which case a team should not be heavily penalised by having being a player down.
There is something very wrong with the decision making process of NRL officials. Even if that is a penalty to the Storm there is no way its a professional foul. So how did they come to that decision?
Because it was a possible try scoring situation the video ref has made some suppositious inference that Simonson took JAC out intentionally to stop a try? It's a ridiculous call to make and anyone who has watched Rugby League for more than a year knows Simonson was not trying to do that.
Exactly. BS only has eyes for the ball, as he is starting his attempt to dive on it, JAC intercedes, and theatrically flops about in a manner that only could convince the most slow-witted among us - and the video refs.
Paul, come on now, how can you speak against the Storm conspiracy! I thought it was a penalty for sure, and interfered with JAC enough to prevent a fair contest for the try, his left arm clearly swings out.
But of course, we all hate the Storm so much that it was a horrible, travesty against all things football!
Yeah, then there was the Smith captain challenge at the end . 'He touched it with his left hand 'they say but that hand was facing backwards. It's a dog's breakfast and they need to sort it now.
Jimmmy, I don't have a problem using the bunker. It's the people in it making the decisions. A good example was the captain's challenge Friday night. The time had expired yet after the replay on tv they then decided to have a challenge. That's not on. These blokes in the bunker are ex first grade referees and they're getting it wrong every week.
DP that's the big one for me. Originally I supported the bunker because I stupidly thought it would take the 'howler ' out of the game. Now it CAUSES more howlers than not. How can that be ? I have no explanation but I am starting to support you and think we should just sink it.
Next set of 6 Storm make their one and only line break of the game at an empty space where Simonsson defends, and get the 6 points which ends up being the difference between the sides..if the buck stops with Annesley it’s time he got in there himself.
Well there it is fellas. Annersley has said the decision was not one he would have made , that the bunker over analysed it and that it was a fair contest for the ball . Noooooo kidding.!!
Now Annersley gets them all right on a Sunday / Monday so the answer is put him in the bunker . We cant keep destroying footy games with childish mistakes.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
It’s hard to understand how Simmonson could propel JAC into touch if he was a metre away? See Harry's reply for an explanation.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
No conspiracy, Harry was correct when he said "he doesn’t grab him, he doesn’t push him, he bumps him with the shoulder while they’re both running for the ball which is legal". The refs boss said it wasn't a penalty.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
His arm being flung sideways wasn’t enough to propel JAC into touch. There was contact by Simmonson’s shoulder but as he was lunging for the ball and couldn’t see JAC running upright he contacted JAC’s body and JAC was propelled into touch.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
If Simmonson was reaching for the ball with his arm crossing JAC's path how was JAC propelled into touch? Simmonson's shoulder would have provided the momentum needed to change JAC's path.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
As Greg Alexander pointed out Simonsson didn't see JAC because he was closer to the ball and had his hands reaching for it when JAC collided into him. If he was a metre away JAC would not have been forced into touch. It should have been no penalty with a 20 metre restart.
Ray Paks
Roar Rookie
Between the two of them, Addo Carr is at fault. If you watch the video replay closely, he (AC) is not really going for the ball, he is running into Simonson, Simonson is the one trying to gain possession and is the only one following the ball and its trajectory, AC is not. He put on a nice academy award winning performance as well with that dive. That is what creates the illusion that he was being impeded, and the goons in the bunker they’re always good enough to fall for clear cut things like this as something ‘more sinister’ happening…
Mango Jack
Roar Guru
Terrible decision, and one that had a big impact on the game. Almost everyone agrees that Simonsson was playing the ball. At worst it was boderline, in which case a team should not be heavily penalised by having being a player down.
Randy
Roar Rookie
There is something very wrong with the decision making process of NRL officials. Even if that is a penalty to the Storm there is no way its a professional foul. So how did they come to that decision? Because it was a possible try scoring situation the video ref has made some suppositious inference that Simonson took JAC out intentionally to stop a try? It's a ridiculous call to make and anyone who has watched Rugby League for more than a year knows Simonson was not trying to do that.
Cugel
Roar Rookie
Exactly. BS only has eyes for the ball, as he is starting his attempt to dive on it, JAC intercedes, and theatrically flops about in a manner that only could convince the most slow-witted among us - and the video refs.
Short Memory
Guest
Remind me where that rule is that says you're not allowed to dive on a loose ball? 'Cos gee it's being broken a lot.
souvalis
Roar Rookie
Did the head of referees confirm that ? Nah..that’s just what you saw thru purple, right ? So, must’ve been forward then.
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Which is fine though, because the Raiders scored one of their tries of two blatent forward passes so, the refs evened it out for them, right.
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Paul, come on now, how can you speak against the Storm conspiracy! I thought it was a penalty for sure, and interfered with JAC enough to prevent a fair contest for the try, his left arm clearly swings out. But of course, we all hate the Storm so much that it was a horrible, travesty against all things football!
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
Yeah, then there was the Smith captain challenge at the end . 'He touched it with his left hand 'they say but that hand was facing backwards. It's a dog's breakfast and they need to sort it now.
Big Daddy
Guest
Jimmmy, I don't have a problem using the bunker. It's the people in it making the decisions. A good example was the captain's challenge Friday night. The time had expired yet after the replay on tv they then decided to have a challenge. That's not on. These blokes in the bunker are ex first grade referees and they're getting it wrong every week.
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
DP that's the big one for me. Originally I supported the bunker because I stupidly thought it would take the 'howler ' out of the game. Now it CAUSES more howlers than not. How can that be ? I have no explanation but I am starting to support you and think we should just sink it.
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
I agree with that as well. Reynolds was bad , Mitchell was much worse.
souvalis
Roar Rookie
Next set of 6 Storm make their one and only line break of the game at an empty space where Simonsson defends, and get the 6 points which ends up being the difference between the sides..if the buck stops with Annesley it’s time he got in there himself.
jimmmy
Roar Rookie
Well there it is fellas. Annersley has said the decision was not one he would have made , that the bunker over analysed it and that it was a fair contest for the ball . Noooooo kidding.!! Now Annersley gets them all right on a Sunday / Monday so the answer is put him in the bunker . We cant keep destroying footy games with childish mistakes.
Greg
Roar Pro
Additionally his arm being flung sideways means the contact wasn't shoulder to shoulder