Parramatta Eels Supporters Website
OK, so putting aside the disgraceful performance yesterday, I'm just trying to get some clarification on a rule that's been bothering me for some time and it occurred again yesterday. Now it wasn't going to make a single bit of difference to the result, but can someone at NRL HQ please explain the King no try ruling. I'm well aware that you can strip the ball when a player is attempting to score, but just how do they justify then calling it a knock on against the attacker? To my mind that was an obvious strip, travelled backwards out of King's hands, so play should continue and King then effectively grounds the ball with his torso, try. I've seen this happen numerous times and it is just plain wrong. Apparently the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team has disappeared. If you're diving and holding the ball one handed and it gets knocked out then I guess you could argue it's a loose carry, but King was holding the ball as tightly as humanly possible to his chest and had it reefed out - there's just no way the ref can say that he lost control, that's ludicrous!! Then we have the instance where Bevan French was penalised for a strip when the player was a foot from the try line and struggling to get there, if he let's go he falls down and scores - so just when is a player "attempting to score" so that it becomes legal to strip when there's more than 1 in the tackle? It's a ridiculous rule and needs fixing. If a team lost a grand final in those circumstances there'd be an outcry. You can see it's an issue, fix it.
The Storm diffused a grubber in goal by grounding it with the torso (according to the bunker). So not really gone