Canes v Tahs (and drinks?)

[NTA]

Don't we get the option of a 22 there?

[African Monkey]

<p>That was given last week.....</p>

[No Quarter]

So Foley had possesion, then it was knocked out of his hands by TJP. Is that a knock on? What did we decide in that other thread?

[Gunner]

<p>Fucking lucky there!</p>

[ACT Crusader]

That was a nice run by TJP but if he was smarter you grab the arm, but not play at the ball<br><br><br>
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[KiwiMurph]

So how was that not a try and the one against the Blues last week was given.

[reprobate]

<p>what the fuck was phipps thinking, idiot.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>i don't know what the letter of the law is, but i'm very happy for that to be ruled a knock-on - we don't want people trying to deliberately hit the ball out of people's hands.</p>

[Gunner]

<p>Nothing in this either, Foley has slipped right into that!</p>

[ACT Crusader]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="595485" data-time="1468060321"><p>So Foley had possesion, then it was knocked out of his hands by TJP. Is that a knock on? What did we decide in that other thread?</p></blockquote>
<br>
Nah this one was different <br><br><br>
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[hydro11]

<p>Nothing in that.</p>

[Gunner]

<p>That is terrible refereeing.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>No way that's a card!</p>

[No Quarter]

This is what we ended the other thread with:<br><br><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="594481" data-time="1467783504"><p>The relevant point (according to the refs directives) is who lost possession not how they lost it. <br>
West had possession, Eves never did. <br>
If West had let go of the ball in a pass before Eves made contact then Eve's knocked the ball forward. If West was still in contact (not control Mr Marshall), then just like scoring a try, he remains in possession. If he then loses the ball backward (even if it is touched by Eve's), it is play on.</p></blockquote>
<br>
So should have been a try based on that.

[ACT Crusader]

Haha, the hometown touchie calls it a YC<br><br><br>
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mattasaurus]

Pollock a cock to the end

[NTA]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="595492" data-time="1468060544"><p>Nothing in that.</p></blockquote>
<br>
On slowmo that looked fucking awful. Single, swinging arm without looking at the man<br><br>
Foley slipping didn't help, but he didn't even have eyes on target

[Tordah]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="595497" data-time="1468060674">
<div>
<p>On slowmo that looked fucking awful. Single, swinging arm without looking at the man<br><br>
Foley slipping didn't help, but he didn't even have eyes on target</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>the arm swung because he didn't have nything to grab because Foley was already on his way down</p>

[antipodean]

<p>Clear penalty but it's a harsh YC when a player drops in front of you like that.</p>

[Gunner]

<p>A couple very bullshit calls there result in a 10 point shift - Canes denied a 7 pointer, followed up by the Tahds being gifted 3 points!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Fuck you Pollock!</p>

[reprobate]

<p>i would want to see that at normal speed to be sure, but in the slo-mo it looked like he could have pulled out after foley slipped - and that makes it nasty and dangerous. if i was sure of that i'd give him red, but i might well be being fooled by the slo-mo.</p>

[Gunner]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tordah" data-cid="595498" data-time="1468060790">
<div>
<p>the arm swung because he didn't have nything to grab because Foley was already on his way down</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Exactly!</p>