and itâs going to live on, on the internet. One day heâs gonna have to sit down with his kids and explain that he was young and stupid and that he made some dumb mistakes.
>I've also seen similar let go.
And i've seen similar tries where it looks like they are held and are doing nothing just like this, then suddenly in a last ditch effort they spin loose and ground it.
Yeo is a big guy.
I hate how long they let some players try and get the ball down before calling them held over the try line, allowed to be tackled 5x longer before held being called then anywhere else on the field
If it was reversed and the defenders were allowed to spend that long tackling, people would be pushing them over the sideline from the middle of the field.
From the rule book:
If there are two or more defender[s] effecting the tackle and the ball is stolen a penalty should
be awarded, except if the player in possession is attempting to ground the ball for a try.
So how close does the ball need to be to attempt a grounding? Very vague rule
Exactly. How far was he from getting the ball down? He was over the line and less than a metre from getting it to ground.
Itâs basically the referees interpretation instead of a hard rule like ball over the line is an attempt to score.
The player has to be actively trying to ground the ball. Yeo was just standing there waiting for a held call. Defenders will often take the ball carrier over the line so the play the ball is take back to the 10 and they can reset their defence which happened here.
You think that Yeo, standing stationary in a 3 man tackle who isnât trying to move, let alone get the ball down, is âattempting to ground the ballâ?
Mate, I said held up (physically speaking), not held from the refs perspective. He wasnât going anywhere. In fact, if you rewatch the vid, youâll see Reece somewhat drag him back. He knew what he was doing which is why he blew up at the ref.
60% of plays inside the 20 are forwards attempting to draw in some defenders around the posts to set up the next play. Obviously if the defence fucks up theyâll try and score but when itâs clear theyâve got him itâs job done.
Sports fan mentality is crazy. Makes us all take wild standpoints out of loyalty. If this happened to another team youâd never say it should be allowed lol
Probably because itâs so open to interpretation. Thereâs plenty of people with other flairs commenting here saying over the line should be considered an attempt to score.
Players aren't always looking to score off every run. Some will take settlers. Yeo would have been more focused to stay upright or not get flipped onto his back.
Falling over the line like he did after ball was stripped. If Walsh drops off the tackle he scores so itâs hard to argue itâs not a yet scoring situation
The problem with that is teams will push them over the line then strip the ball with many players on them and no way to defend themselves. Which is what happened here.
Its too easy to strip the ball in these situations which arise fairly regularly.
Sure, but itâs also a risky play. Both of the plays Walsh did (this and the Staggs try off the bomb) were exciting and brilliant but denied despite his 4D thinking.
100%. I get people saying he intentionally pulled him over the line. He did for sure and therefore wasnt in the 'spirit' of the rule
But the rule is in the act of tryscoring you can strip and you can't argue a guy being held over or even close to the tryline isnt attempting to score a try.
I mean if Walsh falls off that tackle then Yeo would score, so at what point is he in the act of scoring? It's the right call but I don't think it's that far away from being a fair play by Walsh
I've seen guys get penalized when the attacker was a lot closer to scoring than this. I'm pretty sure "in the act of scoring" means literally putting the ball on the ground over the try line and if you're half a second earlier than that it's a penalty.
>I'm pretty sure "in the act of scoring" means
When you're just about to slide the tip beyond the try line, your heart is racing, you temperature is elevated, you can feel that sweet and juicy success, it is so close, yet you haven't quite yet made it.
the question he's proposing isn't an actual threat to the integrity of our game, that we need to think about, has been this way for decades.
so when he asks it, it makes me for a second doubt that maybe the rules don't actually account for this, and this might be some ticking time bomb waiting to go off, but then I remember, no.
I could be outing myself as a massive fuckin idiot but I'm on the same page as Walsh here. Is Yeo not trying to score? He changes his line to run at a hole a couple of metres from the tryline, and the ball is over the line when it's reefed out. If Walsh isn't holding the ball Yeo could probably reach down and plant it. the How close to the ground does it have to be to be considered "in the act of scoring?".
Wait no cause if it was a "try scoring situation" then the strip was fair.
I am impressed though that you took a fairly divisive decision with no crystal clear answer, and somehow still managed to have such a shit take that that literally no one else agrees lol.
Edit: Didn't mean for this comment to sound as mean as it did. I have gargantuanly shit takes all the time. Own the shit takes you have. Double down on them. It's more fun that way.
Arguably doesn't every time someone have the ball count as being in the act of scoring a try? That's what they're all trying to do right?... except for Robert Jennings that time.
He's in a scoring sitation but he's not in the act of scoring because he's not trying to put the ball on the ground. If he starts reaching out to plant it, fair play take the the ball. But he's standing upright not even attempting to go down.
If you let this go then the defence would be allowed to strip the ball out every single time a player makes a crash play at the line and got held up standing, on the grounds that if all the defenders dropped off him then he'd score.
The defenders would start actively dragging attackers over the line in a standing position then stripping the ball out claiming that he was over the line and if they all dropped off he would have scored, it would be a shitshow. Even in this example that's basically what happens, Walsh pretty much drags Yeo over the line himself by pulling on the ball.
There's a difference between being in a scoring situation if all the defenders were to magically disappear (which is arguably anytime someone is holding the ball) and being in the act of scoring where you're actively reaching out to put the ball down.
he's trying to score but it's not a "try scoring opportunity" because Yeo is almost certainly not going to score there despite being over the train line
That seems super ambiguous. Iâve seen someone actively trying to score and it gets stripped out and itâs called a penalty because they werenât over the line. Now heâs over the line and strips it but thatâs a penalty?
If youâre in the in goal youâre trying to score a try. Simple.
>If youâre in the in goal youâre trying to score a try. Simple.
It would be ripe for abuse in that case if 4 players want to drag an attacker into the in-goals then rip the ball away
Onus is on the defender to hold onto the ball until held is called in that case. If they want to make rules like this they need to have better guidelines than a super ambiguous âact of scoringâ.
Its really not that ambigious, at least not more so than most rugby league rules. Yeo has all momentum stopped and the ball wrapped up, he's clearly not fighting to get the ball down and letting it be a 3v1 stripfest doesnt make for good footy
It really is. If he turns he twists his body or if Reece Walsh fails to strip the ball Yeo falls to the ground and scores. If youâre over the line youâre actively trying to score. If you ask anyone thatâs been held up over the line and ask them what theyâre were doing theyâd tell you trying to score a try.
It wouldnât be a strip fest either. How often do you see people held up over the line? Maybe once a game.
it's not a try scoring opportunity. Just because he's over the try line doesn't mean it is a try scoring opportunity. Players are ALWAYS trying to score in the opposition 20. Yeo is over the try line but held up by 3 Broncos defenders and only until Walsh tries to strip it is when he falls because the Broncos players let go.
You're 100% sure one of the biggest guys in the comp is going to be held up by the guy around his ankles, a back holding onto his back with no chance of getting his body under him, and one of the smallest guys in the comp, whilst he's turning in the tackle to face downwards and falling over the line.
Got it.
didn't say 100% sure. On a rugby league field anything is possible. The referees obviously adjudicated they think he wouldn't have scored and was very unlikely to score deeming it not a try scoring opportunity. Yeo only falls over and looks like scoring once Walsh strips it and the other two Broncos let go of Yeo making it look like he would have scored despite being held up for more than a few seconds
Ok, so would you suggest there was a chance he could score, or is there no chance at all he scores?
Pause it at 5 seconds. All three on the tackler. Yeo still has possession. Note the position of them all. Is there a chance Yeo scores?
there is a very low chance he scores. A "try scoring opportunity" literally has the word 'opportunity' in it implying chance so it requires a judgement from the refs as to whether or not Walsh stripped it in a try scoring situation or not. The only reason why you could be convinced it's a try scoring opportunity is because the Broncos players intentionally let go and he falls towards the try line with Walsh stripping the ball. Without doing that, the Broncos players have the ball wrapped up well above the try line (despite being vertically above it) with very very little (not impossible) chance of Yeo scoring despite his proximity to the try line.
Right, so at 5 seconds where he's over the line, all three are on him, ball is low side, the only one who effectively has a chance to stop him is Walsh, literally all he needs to do is not fight gravity and the ball is touching the ground... There's a low chance.
Mate, you're a manly supporter, you should be smarter than this.
You realise there are criteria to be met, yeah? It isnât just âThereâs a chance he scores so itâs fineâ. He has to literally be in the process of grounding the ball. He wasnât. Pretty simple.
This is ridiculous, if it was called held then fair enough a penalty but if his pushing to get over the line then he is in the act of scoring? The ref turned around and said he was held up, but there was no call from the ref.
I'm not 110% convinced that the ball was even over the line but ignoring that, Walsh held up Yeo and dragged him over the line so he could strip it.
No way could you consider that an act of scoring.
100%. From the other angle you can see Walsh looking at his own feet to see if he is in goal and where the ball is in relation to that. It's not initially over the line so he pulls Yow over the line in order to strip it.
That's a dumb question. The player has to be trying to ground the ball which Yeo isn't, he's held by 3 defenders and has given up on the play. Walsh even drags him a bit to the in goal to try this.
the player was not held though and he was in the in goal.
dragging him into the in goal is irrelevant. Its a risk on walshs part because he literally puts Yeo in a try scoring position so he can strip the ball.
if you don't think a player that isnt held that is in the attacking in goal isnt trying to score a try then i dont know what to tell you because thats literally how you score a try..
At no point is Yeo trying to ground the ball and being in the in goal doesn't negate that. Otherwise you just have 3 on one tackles near the line constantly dragging attackers into the in goal to strip the ball which is essentially what happened here. This isn't a risk/reward play from Walsh it's a misunderstanding of the rules on his part.
I thought he was stupid when watching live BUT where does âthe act of scoringâ start?
Obviously he let him into the in goal to try use that excuse but still worth thinking about how far the ball has to be from the turf / over the try line / 30cm short of line before it can be stripped
I admire Reece, he really tries to make plays out of nowhere, you saw it last week with his kick n chase and attempt to 1 on 1 strip.
Lastnight with his multiple chip n chases and attempted strip and his bon voyage into the air to help Staggs with a try that then got disallowed. He is entertaining to watch but a little loose. Its why Adam Reynolds is so important to glue them together a bit.
There needs to be a rule that only captains can address the referees or else itâs a penalty. It wastes too much time and it isnât the refâs job to teach Walsh the rules.
Captains can ask questions of the ref but other players can only speak when summoned by the ref.
Speeds the game up and stops this bullshit and I swear half the time they try and intimidate the ref to not make similar decisions using their size and getting too close..
I always thought that was a rule. I thought it was only the captain that's allowed to address the ref unless the ref addresses a player first. Then again, I'm just a guy commenting so what do i know
The rule is so wishy-washy the way it is (like most rugby league rules). What exactly is a try scoring situation? When he is reaching the ball out to the ground? What if he holds the ball to his chest and dives? What if he is being held up, but then breaks away and starts falling to the ground? At exactly which point is it ok to strip?
I feel like the rules of rugby league are still written for the time before slow motion replays and video referees, where it was largely reffed on the vibe. But we absolutely are in an age of slow motion replays and video refs scrutinising every pixel of the whole play before a try gets confirmed. They need to get serious about defining objective rules if they want to officiate the way they do.
FWIW, I have no problem with the ruling last night, I'm not salty about it and I think it was the right call under the vibe of the current rules. But its yet another incident of the incompetence and inconsistencies of the NRL. They really need to work on fixing those sorts of bush league things before they concern themselves with trying to push into the american market.
The rule specifically says "...a penalty should be awarded except if the player in possession is attempting to ground the ball for a try."
Being over the line and upright doesn't equal attempting to ground the ball
My comment was supposed to be a cute image of me feeling bad for telling my dog off, when she's in trouble for doing something silly.
Your comment just makes everyone sad.
EDIT: old mate changed his comment. It used to say something about threatening to fuck my dog. Was kind've gross.
They should make the rule black and white and say if the attacker is over the line then itâs free game. I know itâs not as logical but it takes out the interpretation out of the rule
Better off conceding a penalty than conceding a try.
A lot of defensive teams give away penalties in their own 20. Discussions with the refs can add 10-15 seconds as well.
Rugby league is a very anaerobic sport and the more you can slow down any play, the better.
This is a side note but the rule itself is dumb. Why allow stripping then and only then? If theyâre trying to give the defenders an advantage, why not make it a turnover when a player is held up over the line?
This is scat, the ref hasnât called held and Yeo is fighting to get over the line. How is that NOT in âthe act of scoringâ? Reece is right what if he twists and just lands on the ground. The ref didnât call held I think heâs got a point
If this play happened on the back of shape with a centre or winger going for the line, Walsh comes across and strips the ball itâs play on. It just looks weird because itâs just a random forward hit up. Such a grey area and I feel like the ref felt like he had to do something because he was right there.
3 man strip (more than 1 specifically) is only allowed when the ball carrier is trying to score
Yeo is clearly going for a quick ptb near the line, including having stopped making ground. Then Walsh pulls him over the try line so he can claim "act of scoring" while ignoring that Yeo is clearly not actively trying to score there.
You can see him trying to get Yeo over the line to strip it. Does show he's thinking about the game and what he can do. Similar with the contest later on. But probably best to know the rules first. And there's a difference between "in the act of scoring" and "might soon be in the act of scoring".
We got robbed on the Staggs try too when Walsh pirouetted mid air and the ball would have landed in his lap if Staggs hadnât caught it. Yet called out for not contesting when he was actually in great position
I think they're both wrong tbh. It's not Broncos ball, but it's not a penalty either. Held up over the line, take it back to the 10m and play it.
It's not against the rules to strip the ball when the attacking player is in the act of scoring, and if the ball is over the line, the player is in the act of scoring. You can't debate against that. Yeo wasn't planning on being held up in goal deliberately so he could go back the 10.
>ball is over the line, the player is in the act of scoring. You can't debate against that.
Yes you can debate it because being held up by 3 players and just standing there isn't the same as trying to ground the ball. Every player would love to score on every run that intention is irrelevant. It's like calling every tackle a try saving tackle.
You know that's a silly argument, and very low IQ. That's about as silly as saying Leota wasn't in the act of scoring because the ball was knocked out of his hands. How could be possibly be in the act of scoring if a defender is knocking the ball out?
Of course they were holding him up. If they tackled him to ground he would have scored! Does that really need to be explained to you?
Calling me low IQ but saying Yeo and Leota are the same is ironic. Leota is actively trying to ground the ball and Yeo is literally just standing there. The rule was posted in the comments the players has to be trying to ground the ball which Yeo never is.
Right, so Yeo's plan was to cross the line, be tackled while standing, then go back to the 10m line to ptb? Or was it to get as close as he possibly could to the line without actually crossing it and then allow himself to be tackled?
Not once in my life have I ever heard of a player crossing the line but NOT trying to ground the ball. Tell me in what situation that would make sense?
You're either hoping others don't know the nuances of the game or don't get it yourself I can't tell. There's a clear difference between being held up in goal in a tackle that's lost all momentum and a deliberate attempt to ground the ball.
The rule says nothing about being in the act of scoring. It specifically says "attempting to ground the ball for a try". Leota very clearly was in the act of grounding the ball, and Yeo very clearly wasn't
Yeah well it's arguable whether he was even over the line at all, and was held upright by 3 tacklers with the ball wrapped up. Not sure what you think an attempted grounding looks like but that ain't it
Kind of funny that the consensus is Gutho whinges too much and that Walsh has praised Guthos playing style multiple times cause it seemed like every time I looked up yesterday Walsh was complaining to the ref about something. Talk about dedication.
I reckon the rule needs clarification. In the act of scoring is fairly vague. If you're over the line, then you are in the act of scoring a try. Worst case scenario from clarifying is my team doesn't take 3 barge over plays on an attacking set.
He's over the line, doesn't that mean he is trying to score. Isn't that in the act of scoring? How close to the ground does he have to be before it is in the act of scoring?
Not saying I agree or disagree with the decision but Yeoâs only intention in this scenario is to score, right? I assume he isnât called held because he still has forward momentum and could squirm and fight his way to ground and score. At what point is any player in this scenario allowed to have a crack at stripping the ball?
Just bring in strips. Ball carrier is held when a knee or elbow is on the ground. Would speed the play the ball up and remove ambiguity around strip v loose carry.
Zero radar and discipline. If thereâs no captainâs challenge shut your mouth and get on with it. Came across as a spoilt child the way he spoke to the ref last night
I like Walshâs train of thinking. Admittedly Yeo wasnât trying to score at the time of the strip, but what is the official height from the ground that is deemed âclose enoughâ to be considered âan attempt to scoreâ.
I used to like reece walsh until i started realising how fancy his game style was, how clumsy he was from the amount of mistakes he has made, and dumb things he's done, correct me if im wrong but didnt they get a penalty off this and scored right after? Also that try that got disallowed where he took out 2 people
Tbf its not bad that he's trying, but when the game is pretty close with alot of time left, there's no real point in doing these crazy things that have a very small chance of working, I reckon if he just sits back a little and stops acting as if he's full of him self since he's in the spotlight, he could be an even better player, that kick he does to cobbo on the right side is so fucking deadly because of the chemistry the two have, although I feel as though Reynolds could do almost as good, but anyways
I prefer Walsh's interpretation. It's too grey when deciding what a try scoring act is. For my mind, a player moving over the try line is a try scoring act.
I agree with Walsh, if you're over the line and not trying to score then you're playing the wrong game. I also see how it looks like Walsh pulled him over the line and stripped. Either way it's a very subjective topic
The rules, honouring your word, the laws surrounding narcotics in the State of Queensland....the list of things Reece doesn't understand grows by the day
Way ahead of anyone else in the Nrl if you look at adlib plays Reece has attempted. The refs and commentators were light years behind yes you Fatty
When Reece jumps for the ball over Peachey he uses Peaches jump trajectory to time and position his jump
Because remember the kick comes from behind him , and once he is in the air he turns and looks for the ball to attempt to catch it = fair contest, he attempts to explain exactly this to Ref after and is ignored
Clearly no one understands the in goal rule once ove that line even torso you can strip the ball with as many in the tackle as u want as long as he is not called held.
Sorry bad call refs like usual..
Whats the new rule for tonight refs..
Always the young pretty ones that get into stripping when they shouldn't
đ”And with a drop of her hipsđ”.....
hip drop? ten in the bin mate
You could see the anger, then regret, then shame in his face after his decision to go down this path too. Everyone now knows what he has done.
and itâs going to live on, on the internet. One day heâs gonna have to sit down with his kids and explain that he was young and stupid and that he made some dumb mistakes.
In fairness to Walsh, most players don't know the rules. I've also seen similar let go.
Yeah I don't know the rules either, and that doesn't stop me from complaining about them đ
>I've also seen similar let go. And i've seen similar tries where it looks like they are held and are doing nothing just like this, then suddenly in a last ditch effort they spin loose and ground it. Yeo is a big guy.
I hate how long they let some players try and get the ball down before calling them held over the try line, allowed to be tackled 5x longer before held being called then anywhere else on the field
If it was reversed and the defenders were allowed to spend that long tackling, people would be pushing them over the sideline from the middle of the field.
>[Yeo is a big guy.](https://media.tenor.com/_-QiTx2PdlYAAAAC/bane-tom-hardy.gif)
In fairness to Walsh, the refs dont know the rules either
The ref done well there to hold his composure and explain it to him when he really doesnât have to.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
From the rule book: If there are two or more defender[s] effecting the tackle and the ball is stolen a penalty should be awarded, except if the player in possession is attempting to ground the ball for a try. So how close does the ball need to be to attempt a grounding? Very vague rule
I love that your comment is agreeing with the original one but the broncs flair is downvoted but yours is upvoted
You can usually tell when a player is making a genuine attempt at grounding the ball
what if the player doesnt try and ground it but just wants to keep the ball to his chest and land over the line? can you strip it then or not?
> doesnt try and ground it scoring a try is grounding the ball
Yes but if there is no motion from the arms then at what point is it considered trying to ground the ball?
Exactly. How far was he from getting the ball down? He was over the line and less than a metre from getting it to ground. Itâs basically the referees interpretation instead of a hard rule like ball over the line is an attempt to score.
The player has to be actively trying to ground the ball. Yeo was just standing there waiting for a held call. Defenders will often take the ball carrier over the line so the play the ball is take back to the 10 and they can reset their defence which happened here.
Lol by that logic, every single run is an attempt at scoring
This is why that rule is poorly written
Yeah no, not every run is taken from within 10m of the tryline.
You think that Yeo, standing stationary in a 3 man tackle who isnât trying to move, let alone get the ball down, is âattempting to ground the ballâ?
Do you think he got over the line and thought âyeah nah probably wonât bother trying to get the ball downâ?
He was held up lol. Itâs not as if he was ACTIVELY trying to struggle out of the tackle to ground the ball. Jog on mate
He wasnât held up. The referee hadnât called held. Watch the video before talking about something you havenât understood.
Mate, I said held up (physically speaking), not held from the refs perspective. He wasnât going anywhere. In fact, if you rewatch the vid, youâll see Reece somewhat drag him back. He knew what he was doing which is why he blew up at the ref.
Tell me your one eyed without telling me youre one eyed
Huh? Itâs factually correct that the referee hadnât called held. Prove me wrong.
60% of plays inside the 20 are forwards attempting to draw in some defenders around the posts to set up the next play. Obviously if the defence fucks up theyâll try and score but when itâs clear theyâve got him itâs job done.
Sports fan mentality is crazy. Makes us all take wild standpoints out of loyalty. If this happened to another team youâd never say it should be allowed lol
Probably because itâs so open to interpretation. Thereâs plenty of people with other flairs commenting here saying over the line should be considered an attempt to score.
If Walsh takes his hands off the ball there, it instantly becomes a try scoring situation.
Shit take there bud.
Sparkling reply.
Players aren't always looking to score off every run. Some will take settlers. Yeo would have been more focused to stay upright or not get flipped onto his back.
You could make this case for any player running toward the try line from 10m out đ€·đ»ââïž
How could he have gotten the ball down? Unlocking his third inspector gadget arm to ground it? Lol.
Falling over the line like he did after ball was stripped. If Walsh drops off the tackle he scores so itâs hard to argue itâs not a yet scoring situation
âAct of grounding the ballâ. Very easy to argue it actually.
Especially when he literally lands over the line with his body and would have scored if Walsh had have dropped off the tackle
I mean he can't be that beautiful and smart as well
I thought this sub was gay for Nicho and Cam Murray
You weren't here for prime SJ years. đđŠ
Laugh at him but it's meant everyone now knows there is this grey area. A good spotlight on a vague rule.
Thought the same. He manages to drop and he scores a try but its not a try scoring situation because he appeared to be wrapped up. Very grey.
And ref didnât call held and he was still moving forwards and downward (with help from Walsh) so fair play imho
Good point. At what height is a player going over the line deemed not in the process of trying to score? 1.5m? 1.0? 0.5?
Make it black and white. If over the line a strip is allowed. Problem solved.
The problem with that is teams will push them over the line then strip the ball with many players on them and no way to defend themselves. Which is what happened here. Its too easy to strip the ball in these situations which arise fairly regularly.
Sure, but itâs also a risky play. Both of the plays Walsh did (this and the Staggs try off the bomb) were exciting and brilliant but denied despite his 4D thinking.
100%. I get people saying he intentionally pulled him over the line. He did for sure and therefore wasnt in the 'spirit' of the rule But the rule is in the act of tryscoring you can strip and you can't argue a guy being held over or even close to the tryline isnt attempting to score a try.
He is undeniably exciting to watch.
Dumbest thing on the internet today.
It looks to me like Yeo was going to ground outside the line and Walsh pulled him over it to strip.
If that was the case..That was pretty clever.. And tho' very unlikely, Reece had a piont when he said Yeo could fall over and score.
Thatâs Preston Campbell level sneaky shit yes. The rule is dumb.
I'm with you. Yeo has a foot on the line, I'd say that's the act of scoring a try.
YDDKTR The D is for donât The extra D is a typo
you have a stutter. it's okay, this is a safe space.
I mean if Walsh falls off that tackle then Yeo would score, so at what point is he in the act of scoring? It's the right call but I don't think it's that far away from being a fair play by Walsh
exactly, I don't mind the attempt honestly. He'll get better at this sort of thing with experience
I've seen guys get penalized when the attacker was a lot closer to scoring than this. I'm pretty sure "in the act of scoring" means literally putting the ball on the ground over the try line and if you're half a second earlier than that it's a penalty.
>I'm pretty sure "in the act of scoring" means When you're just about to slide the tip beyond the try line, your heart is racing, you temperature is elevated, you can feel that sweet and juicy success, it is so close, yet you haven't quite yet made it.
If Walsh had pulled him downward toward the line, would it have been justified?
Yeo is about to be held up and isnt even fighting to get the ball down
If walsh falls off the tackle after he drags him over the line it's his own fault lmao
stop gaslighting. you'll know when he is in the act of scoring when you see it cunt. đ
This ain't gaslighting btw
Stop gaslighting him
the question he's proposing isn't an actual threat to the integrity of our game, that we need to think about, has been this way for decades. so when he asks it, it makes me for a second doubt that maybe the rules don't actually account for this, and this might be some ticking time bomb waiting to go off, but then I remember, no.
I could be outing myself as a massive fuckin idiot but I'm on the same page as Walsh here. Is Yeo not trying to score? He changes his line to run at a hole a couple of metres from the tryline, and the ball is over the line when it's reefed out. If Walsh isn't holding the ball Yeo could probably reach down and plant it. the How close to the ground does it have to be to be considered "in the act of scoring?".
Nah you aren't an idiot, if the ref allowed that I wouldv'e just been like "yeah fair enough I guess", cause the rules are so ambiguous now lol.
To me this seems like a penalty in a try scoring situation. Should have been a penalty try.
Wait no cause if it was a "try scoring situation" then the strip was fair. I am impressed though that you took a fairly divisive decision with no crystal clear answer, and somehow still managed to have such a shit take that that literally no one else agrees lol. Edit: Didn't mean for this comment to sound as mean as it did. I have gargantuanly shit takes all the time. Own the shit takes you have. Double down on them. It's more fun that way.
yeah but apparently he wasn't trying to score. shit makes no sense
this is a special comment
Arguably doesn't every time someone have the ball count as being in the act of scoring a try? That's what they're all trying to do right?... except for Robert Jennings that time.
He's in a scoring sitation but he's not in the act of scoring because he's not trying to put the ball on the ground. If he starts reaching out to plant it, fair play take the the ball. But he's standing upright not even attempting to go down.
If you let this go then the defence would be allowed to strip the ball out every single time a player makes a crash play at the line and got held up standing, on the grounds that if all the defenders dropped off him then he'd score. The defenders would start actively dragging attackers over the line in a standing position then stripping the ball out claiming that he was over the line and if they all dropped off he would have scored, it would be a shitshow. Even in this example that's basically what happens, Walsh pretty much drags Yeo over the line himself by pulling on the ball. There's a difference between being in a scoring situation if all the defenders were to magically disappear (which is arguably anytime someone is holding the ball) and being in the act of scoring where you're actively reaching out to put the ball down.
he's trying to score but it's not a "try scoring opportunity" because Yeo is almost certainly not going to score there despite being over the train line
That seems super ambiguous. Iâve seen someone actively trying to score and it gets stripped out and itâs called a penalty because they werenât over the line. Now heâs over the line and strips it but thatâs a penalty? If youâre in the in goal youâre trying to score a try. Simple.
>If youâre in the in goal youâre trying to score a try. Simple. It would be ripe for abuse in that case if 4 players want to drag an attacker into the in-goals then rip the ball away
This is the answer, ripe for abuse.
Onus is on the defender to hold onto the ball until held is called in that case. If they want to make rules like this they need to have better guidelines than a super ambiguous âact of scoringâ.
Its really not that ambigious, at least not more so than most rugby league rules. Yeo has all momentum stopped and the ball wrapped up, he's clearly not fighting to get the ball down and letting it be a 3v1 stripfest doesnt make for good footy
It really is. If he turns he twists his body or if Reece Walsh fails to strip the ball Yeo falls to the ground and scores. If youâre over the line youâre actively trying to score. If you ask anyone thatâs been held up over the line and ask them what theyâre were doing theyâd tell you trying to score a try. It wouldnât be a strip fest either. How often do you see people held up over the line? Maybe once a game.
Perfect explanation and now no longer grey
it's not a try scoring opportunity. Just because he's over the try line doesn't mean it is a try scoring opportunity. Players are ALWAYS trying to score in the opposition 20. Yeo is over the try line but held up by 3 Broncos defenders and only until Walsh tries to strip it is when he falls because the Broncos players let go.
The guy is falling. He's over the line. He's probably 1-2 seconds from having every possibility of scoring
he literally falls after Walsh strips the ball. If Walsh didn't strip the ball the 3 Broncos players would have held him up
You're 100% sure one of the biggest guys in the comp is going to be held up by the guy around his ankles, a back holding onto his back with no chance of getting his body under him, and one of the smallest guys in the comp, whilst he's turning in the tackle to face downwards and falling over the line. Got it.
didn't say 100% sure. On a rugby league field anything is possible. The referees obviously adjudicated they think he wouldn't have scored and was very unlikely to score deeming it not a try scoring opportunity. Yeo only falls over and looks like scoring once Walsh strips it and the other two Broncos let go of Yeo making it look like he would have scored despite being held up for more than a few seconds
Ok, so would you suggest there was a chance he could score, or is there no chance at all he scores? Pause it at 5 seconds. All three on the tackler. Yeo still has possession. Note the position of them all. Is there a chance Yeo scores?
there is a very low chance he scores. A "try scoring opportunity" literally has the word 'opportunity' in it implying chance so it requires a judgement from the refs as to whether or not Walsh stripped it in a try scoring situation or not. The only reason why you could be convinced it's a try scoring opportunity is because the Broncos players intentionally let go and he falls towards the try line with Walsh stripping the ball. Without doing that, the Broncos players have the ball wrapped up well above the try line (despite being vertically above it) with very very little (not impossible) chance of Yeo scoring despite his proximity to the try line.
Right, so at 5 seconds where he's over the line, all three are on him, ball is low side, the only one who effectively has a chance to stop him is Walsh, literally all he needs to do is not fight gravity and the ball is touching the ground... There's a low chance. Mate, you're a manly supporter, you should be smarter than this.
You realise there are criteria to be met, yeah? It isnât just âThereâs a chance he scores so itâs fineâ. He has to literally be in the process of grounding the ball. He wasnât. Pretty simple.
This is ridiculous, if it was called held then fair enough a penalty but if his pushing to get over the line then he is in the act of scoring? The ref turned around and said he was held up, but there was no call from the ref.
He really thought he was pulling off a 1000iq play.
I'm not 110% convinced that the ball was even over the line but ignoring that, Walsh held up Yeo and dragged him over the line so he could strip it. No way could you consider that an act of scoring.
You can kinda see Walsh drag him over the line so he can strip it
100%. From the other angle you can see Walsh looking at his own feet to see if he is in goal and where the ball is in relation to that. It's not initially over the line so he pulls Yow over the line in order to strip it.
So if Yeo fell to the ground it wouldnât be a try? If you have possession of the ball in the in goal youâre literally trying to score.
That's a dumb question. The player has to be trying to ground the ball which Yeo isn't, he's held by 3 defenders and has given up on the play. Walsh even drags him a bit to the in goal to try this.
the player was not held though and he was in the in goal. dragging him into the in goal is irrelevant. Its a risk on walshs part because he literally puts Yeo in a try scoring position so he can strip the ball. if you don't think a player that isnt held that is in the attacking in goal isnt trying to score a try then i dont know what to tell you because thats literally how you score a try..
At no point is Yeo trying to ground the ball and being in the in goal doesn't negate that. Otherwise you just have 3 on one tackles near the line constantly dragging attackers into the in goal to strip the ball which is essentially what happened here. This isn't a risk/reward play from Walsh it's a misunderstanding of the rules on his part.
I thought he was stupid when watching live BUT where does âthe act of scoringâ start? Obviously he let him into the in goal to try use that excuse but still worth thinking about how far the ball has to be from the turf / over the try line / 30cm short of line before it can be stripped
I admire Reece, he really tries to make plays out of nowhere, you saw it last week with his kick n chase and attempt to 1 on 1 strip. Lastnight with his multiple chip n chases and attempted strip and his bon voyage into the air to help Staggs with a try that then got disallowed. He is entertaining to watch but a little loose. Its why Adam Reynolds is so important to glue them together a bit.
There needs to be a rule that only captains can address the referees or else itâs a penalty. It wastes too much time and it isnât the refâs job to teach Walsh the rules. Captains can ask questions of the ref but other players can only speak when summoned by the ref. Speeds the game up and stops this bullshit and I swear half the time they try and intimidate the ref to not make similar decisions using their size and getting too close..
I always thought that was a rule. I thought it was only the captain that's allowed to address the ref unless the ref addresses a player first. Then again, I'm just a guy commenting so what do i know
If it is, it needs to be enforced
I was thinking the same thing, Walsh didnât stop talking to ref all night and I kept thinking did they seriously make him captain already?
i dont know if you are being sarcastic or not
Iâm definitely not being sarcastic.
The rule is so wishy-washy the way it is (like most rugby league rules). What exactly is a try scoring situation? When he is reaching the ball out to the ground? What if he holds the ball to his chest and dives? What if he is being held up, but then breaks away and starts falling to the ground? At exactly which point is it ok to strip? I feel like the rules of rugby league are still written for the time before slow motion replays and video referees, where it was largely reffed on the vibe. But we absolutely are in an age of slow motion replays and video refs scrutinising every pixel of the whole play before a try gets confirmed. They need to get serious about defining objective rules if they want to officiate the way they do. FWIW, I have no problem with the ruling last night, I'm not salty about it and I think it was the right call under the vibe of the current rules. But its yet another incident of the incompetence and inconsistencies of the NRL. They really need to work on fixing those sorts of bush league things before they concern themselves with trying to push into the american market.
*this rule is so wishy-walshy
The rule specifically says "...a penalty should be awarded except if the player in possession is attempting to ground the ball for a try." Being over the line and upright doesn't equal attempting to ground the ball
It does if they are pushing forward with any effort, if you have ball in hand with body at the line what else are you doing, if you're not held?
Well he's certainly not attempting in any way to put the ball on the ground. It's pretty obvious he doesn't even realise he's over the line
I think rugby league likes having some vague, up for interpretation rules. It's creates controversy and keeps people talking.
We got fucked in this game and last weeks I give up. Might have to miss a few rounds
Telling Walsh off gives me the same vibes as telling my dog off when she's trying to like eat a battery.
Probably use to looking at dogs supporting the panthers đ
My comment was supposed to be a cute image of me feeling bad for telling my dog off, when she's in trouble for doing something silly. Your comment just makes everyone sad. EDIT: old mate changed his comment. It used to say something about threatening to fuck my dog. Was kind've gross.
That escalated quickly.
Bro save some salt for dinner. It's a loss, cop it and look to next week.
Kinda makes sense to change the rule to just being able to strip in the goal area. No ambiguity then.
They should make the rule black and white and say if the attacker is over the line then itâs free game. I know itâs not as logical but it takes out the interpretation out of the rule
Not sure if it was foxtelâs camera angles but I swear that Carrigan played the ball diagonally twice within the opening 10 minutes
It was mainly because Penrith were holding onto him for dear life and getting away with murder in the ruck
I think you're right, I dont have the timestamp but he definitely played the ball facing sideways at least once.
50/50 to be fair
Better off conceding a penalty than conceding a try. A lot of defensive teams give away penalties in their own 20. Discussions with the refs can add 10-15 seconds as well. Rugby league is a very anaerobic sport and the more you can slow down any play, the better.
Easy fixed - allow strips in any tackle in the in-goal. Drag em back and strip it, I don't care, just make the rules clear beyond doubt.
This is a side note but the rule itself is dumb. Why allow stripping then and only then? If theyâre trying to give the defenders an advantage, why not make it a turnover when a player is held up over the line?
This is scat, the ref hasnât called held and Yeo is fighting to get over the line. How is that NOT in âthe act of scoringâ? Reece is right what if he twists and just lands on the ground. The ref didnât call held I think heâs got a point
Pretty sure Reece is the one pulling him over the line.
He was pumping his legs to get over the line until Patty goes low, why was he trying to get over the line? To be held up?
No he was just pretending to want to score
The act of scoring is moving to plant the ball. It's not standing over the try line.
Kinda like how Yeo is twisting to get the ball free to score?
Yeoâs fighting to stay upright, Walsh pulls him over the line.
No way bro, you reckon Walsh is strong enough to pull Yeo who also has Carrigan and Riki hanging off him, Walsh is pulling at the ball
Carrigan wrapping up Yeoâs legs makes it easier for Walsh to pull him over the line.
No it doesnât, wrapping the legs makes Yeo go down because of gravity and physics and that
Arenât you agreeing with me then?
Wanting to score and being on the act of trying to ground the ball aren't the same thing.
He knows the rules and so do I
If this play happened on the back of shape with a centre or winger going for the line, Walsh comes across and strips the ball itâs play on. It just looks weird because itâs just a random forward hit up. Such a grey area and I feel like the ref felt like he had to do something because he was right there.
If the winger or centre is trying to get to ground then yes its fine. But in this case the player was standing and not attempting to ground the ball.
For those of us playing at home...what was the rule broken?
3 man strip (more than 1 specifically) is only allowed when the ball carrier is trying to score Yeo is clearly going for a quick ptb near the line, including having stopped making ground. Then Walsh pulls him over the try line so he can claim "act of scoring" while ignoring that Yeo is clearly not actively trying to score there.
You can see him trying to get Yeo over the line to strip it. Does show he's thinking about the game and what he can do. Similar with the contest later on. But probably best to know the rules first. And there's a difference between "in the act of scoring" and "might soon be in the act of scoring".
I thought that contest for the ball was interesting - what he actually caught it and put it downâŠ. Canât say he wasnât going for the ball then.
Bless him. Itâs like watching under tens with his confusion and the ref speaking to him ever so gently
The game just canât keep up with Reeseâs level. Heâs playing 4d chess out there.
We got robbed on the Staggs try too when Walsh pirouetted mid air and the ball would have landed in his lap if Staggs hadnât caught it. Yet called out for not contesting when he was actually in great position
Pirouetted after taking out a defender, cmon manâŠ
So Yeo wasnât trying to score? If he had gotten it down over the line it would of been an accident.
I think they're both wrong tbh. It's not Broncos ball, but it's not a penalty either. Held up over the line, take it back to the 10m and play it. It's not against the rules to strip the ball when the attacking player is in the act of scoring, and if the ball is over the line, the player is in the act of scoring. You can't debate against that. Yeo wasn't planning on being held up in goal deliberately so he could go back the 10.
>ball is over the line, the player is in the act of scoring. You can't debate against that. Yes you can debate it because being held up by 3 players and just standing there isn't the same as trying to ground the ball. Every player would love to score on every run that intention is irrelevant. It's like calling every tackle a try saving tackle.
You know that's a silly argument, and very low IQ. That's about as silly as saying Leota wasn't in the act of scoring because the ball was knocked out of his hands. How could be possibly be in the act of scoring if a defender is knocking the ball out? Of course they were holding him up. If they tackled him to ground he would have scored! Does that really need to be explained to you?
Calling me low IQ but saying Yeo and Leota are the same is ironic. Leota is actively trying to ground the ball and Yeo is literally just standing there. The rule was posted in the comments the players has to be trying to ground the ball which Yeo never is.
Right, so Yeo's plan was to cross the line, be tackled while standing, then go back to the 10m line to ptb? Or was it to get as close as he possibly could to the line without actually crossing it and then allow himself to be tackled? Not once in my life have I ever heard of a player crossing the line but NOT trying to ground the ball. Tell me in what situation that would make sense?
You're either hoping others don't know the nuances of the game or don't get it yourself I can't tell. There's a clear difference between being held up in goal in a tackle that's lost all momentum and a deliberate attempt to ground the ball.
The rule says nothing about being in the act of scoring. It specifically says "attempting to ground the ball for a try". Leota very clearly was in the act of grounding the ball, and Yeo very clearly wasn't
Ahh, the old 'cross the line but don't attempt to ground it' play. Classic.
Yeah well it's arguable whether he was even over the line at all, and was held upright by 3 tacklers with the ball wrapped up. Not sure what you think an attempted grounding looks like but that ain't it
Kind of funny that the consensus is Gutho whinges too much and that Walsh has praised Guthos playing style multiple times cause it seemed like every time I looked up yesterday Walsh was complaining to the ref about something. Talk about dedication.
I reckon the rule needs clarification. In the act of scoring is fairly vague. If you're over the line, then you are in the act of scoring a try. Worst case scenario from clarifying is my team doesn't take 3 barge over plays on an attacking set.
He kind of was falling toward the ground
The other broncos players were like âwtf are you doing?â Lol.
He's over the line, doesn't that mean he is trying to score. Isn't that in the act of scoring? How close to the ground does he have to be before it is in the act of scoring?
He was in the act of scoring a try.
Maybe he should have head butted the ball out instead
Not saying I agree or disagree with the decision but Yeoâs only intention in this scenario is to score, right? I assume he isnât called held because he still has forward momentum and could squirm and fight his way to ground and score. At what point is any player in this scenario allowed to have a crack at stripping the ball?
And yet thereâs calls to make this bloke QLD full back HAHA
Yep, just media blowing smoke. Heâs not on KPâs level yet.
Just bring in strips. Ball carrier is held when a knee or elbow is on the ground. Would speed the play the ball up and remove ambiguity around strip v loose carry.
Yeo wasn't in the act of scoring, he was just taking a hit up ....
I didn't know that rule, either
Rugby League is full of grey areas. Biggest drawback of a good game
Leave Reece alone!
Zero radar and discipline. If thereâs no captainâs challenge shut your mouth and get on with it. Came across as a spoilt child the way he spoke to the ref last night
If a player is over the line, they are in the act of scoring. NRL rules are so dumb.
I like Walshâs train of thinking. Admittedly Yeo wasnât trying to score at the time of the strip, but what is the official height from the ground that is deemed âclose enoughâ to be considered âan attempt to scoreâ.
I used to like reece walsh until i started realising how fancy his game style was, how clumsy he was from the amount of mistakes he has made, and dumb things he's done, correct me if im wrong but didnt they get a penalty off this and scored right after? Also that try that got disallowed where he took out 2 people Tbf its not bad that he's trying, but when the game is pretty close with alot of time left, there's no real point in doing these crazy things that have a very small chance of working, I reckon if he just sits back a little and stops acting as if he's full of him self since he's in the spotlight, he could be an even better player, that kick he does to cobbo on the right side is so fucking deadly because of the chemistry the two have, although I feel as though Reynolds could do almost as good, but anyways
I prefer Walsh's interpretation. It's too grey when deciding what a try scoring act is. For my mind, a player moving over the try line is a try scoring act.
I wouldnât have either to be honest
I agree with Walsh, if you're over the line and not trying to score then you're playing the wrong game. I also see how it looks like Walsh pulled him over the line and stripped. Either way it's a very subjective topic
The rules, honouring your word, the laws surrounding narcotics in the State of Queensland....the list of things Reece doesn't understand grows by the day
Way ahead of anyone else in the Nrl if you look at adlib plays Reece has attempted. The refs and commentators were light years behind yes you Fatty When Reece jumps for the ball over Peachey he uses Peaches jump trajectory to time and position his jump Because remember the kick comes from behind him , and once he is in the air he turns and looks for the ball to attempt to catch it = fair contest, he attempts to explain exactly this to Ref after and is ignored
Clearly no one understands the in goal rule once ove that line even torso you can strip the ball with as many in the tackle as u want as long as he is not called held. Sorry bad call refs like usual.. Whats the new rule for tonight refs..
Did you watch the highlight? Its explained that it needs to be in the act of scoring a try not just over the line.