Blues v Canes
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="563980" data-time="1457682896"><p>maybe they should be looking at this in real time too</p></blockquote>
<br>
And in real time, it would be forward. <br><br>
Blues should be worrying less about the TMO, and more about not putting themselves under pressure with penalties. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Donsteppa" data-cid="563984" data-time="1457682986">
<div>
<p>And in real time, it would be forward.<br><br>
Blues should be worrying less about the TMO, and more about not putting themselves under pressure with penalties.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>as was the knock before...</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But yeah the Blues have been shite.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="563985" data-time="1457683033"><p>as was the knock before...<br>
<br>
But yeah the Blues have been shite.</p></blockquote>
<br>
Yep, <br><br>
Dumb arse #1 flies into a ruck with his shoulder<br>
Dumb arse #2 plays the opposition in the air at the resulting lineout<br><br>
If you're then having to find the tiniest of possible knock ons in slow mo to save you from a try, then you're in for a season as long as the non-scrumming Chiefs. -
That was bizzare logic from the refs and comms. A lot of things look good in real time. Obvious knock on.<br><br>
Awesome no-try from Li, man that kid has wheels. -
<p>dunno, the comms in this game used it, then the TMO did in awarding the try...?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Agree, do not use slow mo if you are using 'real time' as the measure, am sure Sky would prefer that as they wouldnt need to do it in HD</p> -
Blues look better when they get their pick and drive going
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Donsteppa" data-cid="563988" data-time="1457683245">
<div>
<p>If you're then having to find the tiniest of possible knock ons in slow mo to save you from a try, then you're in for a season as long as the non-scrumming Chiefs.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>??</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It isnt about saving anything, a small knock on is the same as a big knock on, still a knock on.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You just want decisions correct and consistent, and that is apparently what the technology is there for.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Donsteppa" data-cid="563988" data-time="1457683245"><p>Yep, <br><br>
Dumb arse #1 flies into a ruck with his shoulder<br>
Dumb arse #2 plays the opposition in the air at the resulting lineout<br><br>
If you're then having to find the tiniest of possible knock ons in slow mo to save you from a try, then you're in for a season as long as the non-scrumming Chiefs.</p></blockquote>
<br>
I'm neutral in this. The Blues have been crap at times but I am commenting only on the incident in question, not looking for excuses. <br>
That knock on was clear and obvious in slomo. That's how it should have been called. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Donsteppa" data-cid="563992" data-time="1457683343"><p>Maybe I'm being a dinosaur, but my first thought was that the Canes "knock on" would always have been a try in the pre-TMO era.</p></blockquote>
As would plenty of non given tries in the modern era. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="563995" data-time="1457683459">
<div>
<p>The Hurricanes one was 50/50. The Blues one was clearly forward. You can disagree with the decisions made but they weren't analogous.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>canes one wasnt 50/50 definte knock on...Blues one looked 51/49 in real time, clearly forward on replay</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="563995" data-time="1457683459"><p>The Hurricanes one was 50/50. The Blues one was clearly forward. You can disagree with the decisions made but they weren't analogous.</p></blockquote>
<br>
What was 50/50 about it? -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="563998" data-time="1457683559">
<div>
<p>canes one wasnt 50/50 definte knock on...Blues one looked 51/49 in real time, clearly forward on replay</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Nah. Blues was forward in any time. Hurricanes was a knock on in slow mo but not in real time.</p> -
<p>West gets Blues within a score...now the 'real time' try becomes more 'controversial'</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crucial" data-cid="563999" data-time="1457683599">
<div>
<p>What was 50/50 about it?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>If we are using real time it was a try. If we use slow mo it wasn't. Blues was forward in any time.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="564000" data-time="1457683647">
<div>
<p>Nah. Blues was forward in any time. Hurricanes was a knock on in slow mo but not in real time.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>agree to disagree, thought it was a knock on on first viewing</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="564003" data-time="1457683685">
<div>
<p>agree to disagree, thought it was a knock on on first viewing</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Then your complaint isn't about real time or slow mo at all. You are complaining that the referee used real time footage incorrectly.</p>
