I was really impressed with you lot yesterday, you could of won the game in the first 20 minutes if you took your chances. I thought Hall was your best player on the pitch, he made great yards even when he was under pressure. Smith didn't do much apart from the drop out kick in the second half and after watching the saints game i thought Lyn was going to destroy us on the wing. I can see you lot surprising a lot of teams especially at home this year. Good luck apart for rest of the season

Lyne was never stopped and momentum forward was continuous never the less he still looked to be short and probably knocked on from the highlights

The ref may have been too quick on his whistle (and sometimes not at all given some holding down) but we wee our worse enemy too many simple errors and too much sily play trying to score off every ball, until that changes we won't win many, although I do think there will be a game where it will all click and forward passes won't be forward and passes will stick, lets just hope it's sooner rather than later!

And what about the other frames where he doesn't have a hand on him and Lyne is a couple of yards closer to the line? The 'tackling' player ends up behind the line when lynes momentum is halted. IMO it doesn't matter as I'm still not convinced he actually got the ball on or over the line

About the Huaraki-Ryan incident, it's just onf of those unfortunate things that happen. Huaraki din't lead with his elbow. If a tackler is off slightly and gets a knee in the face from someone running normally, is it a penalty to the defending team? Of course not. Nobody wants to see stuff like that, but it hapens from time to time.

Sorry about the link, yes that's what it's suppoed to be though. Taylor never loses contact once he's made the tackle though in real-time or otherwise. And frankly, he doesn't get the ball down on/over the line anyway!

Wakey had ample opportunities to take a more commanding lead in the first 10-15 minutes yesterday, had they taken them it may have been a very different outcome.

That's true about taylor not having a hand on him, he is still laid on top of him though. My understanding of the rules may be a little off there, is a hand required to be on the player for a tackle to be completed?

I probably wouldn't have argued with the ref giving play on in all fairness. It looks more of a double-movement than a try though if I had to pick one of those two options.

and I think he looks tackled on the video.

Quote ="andyh0064"icon_lol.gif About the Huaraki-Ryan incident, it's just onf of those unfortunate things that happen. Huaraki din't lead with his elbow. If a tackler is off slightly and gets a knee in the face from someone running normally, is it a penalty to the defending team? Of course not. Nobody wants to see stuff like that, but it hapens from time to time. Sorry about the link, yes that's what it's suppoed to be though. Taylor never loses contact once he's made the tackle though in real-time or otherwise. And frankly, he doesn't get the ball down on/over the line anyway! Wakey had ample opportunities to take a more commanding lead in the first 10-15 minutes yesterday, had they taken them it may have been a very different outcome.'" I beg to differ, Taylor clearly slides straight over Lyne whilst Lyne is still in motion bit.ly/1GT7WtM

Quote ="andyh0064"icon_lol.gif About the Huaraki-Ryan incident, it's just onf of those unfortunate things that happen. Huaraki din't lead with his elbow. If a tackler is off slightly and gets a knee in the face from someone running normally, is it a penalty to the defending team? Of course not. Nobody wants to see stuff like that, but it hapens from time to time. Sorry about the link, yes that's what it's suppoed to be though. Taylor never loses contact once he's made the tackle though in real-time or otherwise. And frankly, he doesn't get the ball down on/over the line anyway! Wakey had ample opportunities to take a more commanding lead in the first 10-15 minutes yesterday, had they taken them it may have been a very different outcome.'" I beg to differ, Taylor clearly slides straight over Lyne whilst Lyne is still in motion bit.ly/1GT7WtM

Hard to argue with that as a double movement - and he gives himself away by reaching out; if the tackler had fallen away, he should have got up and run over the line, or at least rolled and placed the ball down. Result = try.

A bit of white line fever from Reece, resulting in a decision that most RL fans would agree with.

I think this is the thing with rugby league refs and how they apply the rules these days. Players lead with the forearm all the time these days and it's never penalised. I remember watching Peacock do it all game last year. Look at the ptb from Morley after his break, ten years ago he'd have been pinged for an incorrect ptb - the ball doesn't even travel backwards. It's the same with the ruck management: referees turn a blind eye to so much and then suddenly they'll remember there are rules to apply and ping a team for something that has happened ten times beforehand.

It's not hard to argue it all, Taylor clearly fails to stay in contact with Lyne whilst Lyne still has momentum, that does not constitute a tackle and Lyne is free to reach out, roll over or stand up and do a bit of a boogie before putting the ball down!

Watch it again in slow motion. The only time Taylor has no contact with Lyne is AFTER the second movement so the offence has already occured and in any case he was short of the line by the looks of it. It was the correct decision. In fact the break possibly came from a forward pass as well. But apart from that it was a good try.

I've watched it several times, the defender slides over Lyne in one constant motion while Lynes momentum is unhalted, Lyne is within his rights to continue.

I agree Avenger.
Alas that is history now.

Whilst never losing contact with him until his momentum had stopped. Rules say tackle complete.

Well you're not seeing something that I am,so we'll just agree to disagree!

Toss up for it

The rule does not say tackle complete. The rule is quite specific that the tackled player must be held by the tackler. There's even a note on the broken tackle to deal with the situation where the tackler lose his hold on the ball carrier before the ball carrier is grounded. I didn't see the Lyne incident but your interpretation of the rule sounds to be incorrect.

Well given Taylor was in contract with Lyne when he was first grounded and still was when he made the second move it's tackle complete then. If he had slid off before the second effort then its play on but he didn't, he was still in contact with him. No try, move on.

As I said, I havent seen the incident so you may or may not be correct. However, you keep persisting with this notion that Taylor was in contact with Lyne therefore Lyne was tackled. The rules however require more than just being in contact, they need the tackler to be holding the tackled player. Just pointing out the rule because you don't seem to understand it.

I understand it perfectly thanks, he doesn't have to be holding him, placing a hand on him whilst on the floor constitutes a tackle. And he had a hand on him at all times until after the second movement? That good enough for you cocker?

You are showing your confusion regarding the rules even more now ( to say nothing of your slightly peevish and aggressive nature). You say the tackler doesn't have to be holding Lyne even though the RFL laws of the game clearly state that he does. Obviously you know better than the RFL law makers. The issue of effecting a tackle by touching a player on the ground with the hand is for a quite different situation to the one that sounds to have been the case here. Just having contact with the hand would not normally constitute a tackle. Anyway, I believe the 'try' was disallowed so, as you say, "Move on".

Yep i'm sick of talking about it. It was the correct decision though!

No it wasn't!

:1sxwe4g5

As I said earlier - if Reece had kept his cool and got up and carried the ball over the line, the 'broken' tackle would have been at the forefront of the refs mind and the try would have stood; he created doubt by reaching out, and confirmed that doubt by appearing to ground it short.

I like a good ref rant, but if that had been awarded against us, we'd be having the same argument on here, but from the reverse position.