Did Gough make a mistake in the "can't Captains Challenge" incident (Williams' almost-try) with 2:56 remaining in the first half against the Tigers Round 5? Is that and other referring indiscretions - basically orchestrating thee game - why Gough has been dropped for Round 6? And the Moses warning letter is a smokescreen to cover up an awful refereeing performance?
At least, how are we to interpret the Captains Challenge rule? Has an inconsistency in it just been unearthed? I'm interested in clear expositions of how the following chain of reasoning is WRONG. That is, that I am wrong and the ref got it all right
Context: Williams has picked up a loose ball, ran 30-40m, and got close to line the Tigers line before being set upon by three Tigers defenders. Williams gets up to play the ball and Korisau (sp?) comes from behind and knocks the ball out. Agreed facts.
- Gough tells Moses that because he had "not ruled the tackle complete" it's a lost ball. That he won't win a challenge. This seems to suggest Gough is saying Moses cannot challenge a decision to "play on"? But if Gough has not called tackle complete nor has he ruled play on?
- Both Ryles and Moses in the press conference say they suspect Williams will have been called for a double movement if he dived over to score. I cannot attach the photos (getting a "file too large" error) but Williams' ball-carrying arm AND the ball touch the ground and at least one Tiger (Doihei) has his hands on Williams at that point. Freeze frame the footage to verify. So as best I can tell a double movement was in fact in play? Also Williams is 100% steadying to play the ball: the ball has been swapped from right to left arm while getting up and his right foot is outstretched in a play the ball not diving forward stance.
- Now look at the rules for Captains Challenge below. There was a change in possession resulting in a structured restart (scrum; Tigers feed), which CAN be challenged. Also look at the rules for when a player is tackled Williams satisfied both conditions A and D
My interpretation is that Gough failed to call held as required. Note if it was a surrender tackle, which the "sole responsibility of the referee to identify", he would have identified it. I think Gough then confused himself that it was a play on rather than a structured restart condition.
Note that IF Gough's reasoning was solid here, we would NOT be seeing strips identified by Captains Challenge?
Replies
Gough isn't named to referee this weekend. I think his boss agrees with you.
Williams was tackled, plain and simple. Gough messed it up, then ensured it couldn't be challenged by conflating his non-call with Williams not being tackled. Held is not said by the referee in every tackle. If Gough is saying the only way for a tackle to be complete is for the ref to call held then I look forward to players just getting up when tackled on the ground if a held call isn't made.
Super, remeber those press sessions Annesley would run each week, where he went thorugh controversial incidents and identified where he thought the ref got it right or wrong?
Imagine Annesley confronted with the question of "is a player tackled or a tackle complete ONLY when the ref says so?" I'd bet alot of money on Annesley saying NO and pointing to the Conditions A to D + the Surrender tackle rule, and then noting what every single fan knows without exception, that players routinely launch into attempting to play the ball without awaiting a call as soon as any of the five condotions for ' is tackled' have been met.
Also note the rules only refer to a 'held' call being required in the case of lifting and surrender tackles.
Actually, being so close to the try line it was a classic sin bin offence by the player knocking the ball out. Not since probably Henry P, have we witnessed such an incompetent performance. Touchies were bad too. Missed a blatant strip that led to a Tigers try late in first half. And NRL360 panelist said the penalty to level the score for Tigers was a square-up. Not my words, but I think it was Anasta who said it.
I was reading ( Googling NRL Rules) and it clearly stated and I'm assuming this is correct regarding 2 Questions I asked. One was about Williams and the referee Gough telling Moses that because he ( Gough) hadn't called 'Held' then the tackle isn't complete but this isn't actually correct. It states in the NRL Rules that once an attacking player 'momentum' has stopped by the opposition then the tackle is completed regardless of the referee calling 'held'
So legally Williams was in the right and Moses had every right to challenge and Referee Gough was wrong. Next we have the winning penalty awarded to the Tigers because Walker was deemed 'offside'. According to NRL Rules the RUCK is completed when the player has played the ball by rolling the ball backwards with his foot and has nothing to do with Api passing the ball! Again yet another huge error by Referee Gough