Stormers vs Chiefs
-
@crucial said in Stormers vs Chiefs:
@rebound said in Stormers vs Chiefs:
@shadowtrooper TMO didn't want to embarras the referee there. Referee rules no try knock on. TMO answers no clear evidence of knock on, stay with on filed decision (which he then makes up) forward pass.
Could he just not have said, no knock on but a forward pass. But clearly there neither was clear evidence of that as well. Just a f up and worrying trend.
I was pissed off at that one. Basically the ref said 'on field decision try' then changed to 'on field is no try' because the AR was insistent that there was an obvious knock on by Ngatai. As the pictures showed it wasn't clear and obvious at all. There was no proof of any knock on or forward pass and the grounding was clean, yet no try awarded.
Ref appeared to me to go with 'on field decision no try' purely out of solidarity with AR. Based on TMO AR was wrong, so no reason why try couldn't be awarded, which ought to have been the question.
-
@pakman said in Stormers vs Chiefs:
Tu’inukuafe, Harris and Ta’avao clearly on top scrum time. Not bad for second stringers!!
Third or fourth stringers for the props.
The Chiefs scrum was the only positive against the Jaguares a week earlier. Nick White must be doing something right after replacing Hoeft.
And it was great to hear Charlie say Nepo should be ready to go after they return to NZ.
-
-
@pakman said in Stormers vs Chiefs:
@crucial said in Stormers vs Chiefs:
@rebound said in Stormers vs Chiefs:
@shadowtrooper TMO didn't want to embarras the referee there. Referee rules no try knock on. TMO answers no clear evidence of knock on, stay with on filed decision (which he then makes up) forward pass.
Could he just not have said, no knock on but a forward pass. But clearly there neither was clear evidence of that as well. Just a f up and worrying trend.
I was pissed off at that one. Basically the ref said 'on field decision try' then changed to 'on field is no try' because the AR was insistent that there was an obvious knock on by Ngatai. As the pictures showed it wasn't clear and obvious at all. There was no proof of any knock on or forward pass and the grounding was clean, yet no try awarded.
Ref appeared to me to go with 'on field decision no try' purely out of solidarity with AR. Based on TMO AR was wrong, so no reason why try couldn't be awarded, which ought to have been the question.
Problem is that the TMO can only change on field decision if he has proof of difference. If the on-field was 'try unless you can prove a knock on' then the try would have been awarded as the TMO had no proof of a k.o.
Instead it was 'No Try unless you can prove there wasn't a k.o.'. TMO can't prove there was no k.o. therefore no try.
I kind of get why Fraser sided with his AR yet is seems inconsistent with how they deal with 'foot in touch'. Usually if the AR says there was a f.i.t they check the replay for that unless the AR says it was clear and obvious.
There is no way that potential touch by Ngatai was C and O.
And yet the Stormers are the ones crying about the ref and laying a complaint to SANZAAR. Go figure.
