Rebels v Chiefs, Rd 12 @ AAMI Park

[zer0]

As good an advertisement as I've ever seen for returning to neutral referees.

 

[KevinO]

About time the rebels had a ref favour us.

 

[cyclopath]

That was bizarre.
But go the Rebels!

 

[galumay]

It's arrant nonsense to suggest the ref's are biased. They make mistakes, whether they are 'neutral' or not. (neutral being the wrong term anyway, all ref's are neutral by definition of their role)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[boyo]

Will Dave Rennie talk to Andrew Lees?

 

[galumay]

Just watched it again, as ref says player was behind ball carrier so it wasn't accidental off side, and it wasn't obstruction because no one that could have tackled him was impeded. Ref's got it right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[galumay]

BTW, I am going for the Waikato boys so don't accuse me of bias, please!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

^^^^^^ I don't mind so much when refs make a mistake in real time but for those officials to watch it on the big screen & then STILL get it so fuckin wrong it ain't funny, well, that's a whole different steaming pile to consider.

 

[galumay]

^^^^^^ I don't mind so much when refs make a mistake in real time but for those officials to watch it on the big screen & then STILL get it so fuckin wrong it ain't funny, well, that's a whole different steaming pile to consider.

Honestly mate I have just watched ½ dozen times again, they got it right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[qwerty51]

Ok what about Lowe's card, what about the Chiefs "obstruction" maul? Rebels knocked it on at least twice without being called. It's been a joke.

 

[galumay]

Ok what about Lowe's card, what about the Chiefs "obstruction" maul? Rebels knocked it on at least twice without being called. It's been a joke.

Yep, I said I didn't think it should have been a YC, but I don't believe it's bias. After all if they were biased it would have been a red card based on the alleged offence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ACT Crusader]

Just watched it again, as ref says player was behind ball carrier so it wasn't accidental off side, and it wasn't obstruction because no one that could have tackled him was impeded. Ref's got it right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree they got it right, but the explanation was poor.

 

[boyo]

@qwerty51: are you trying to take over from @Shiggins?

 

[galumay]

I agree they got it right, but the explanation was poor.

Well when I replayed it the ref tells the Chiefs, "it wasn't off side because the ball carrier was in front of the player that ran into him, so he is onside", I didn't hear him explain about the view that no potential tacklers were impeded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

SBW not nearly as effective without AC feeding him.

Reb 7 lucky not to be at least penalised there, had plenty of time to roll clear.

DMac on now, not sure why he didn't start.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Gotta be a card there for the lazy running back through the Tribe's ruck. Q'uelle surprise, just another warning, how many does Higginbum get?

 

[qwerty51]

oh Naivalu..

 

[galumay]

I think the same number as the Chiefs in the first half!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Try Ngatai, DMac all smiles then nails it from out wide, 10-16 & 20 to go..... GAME ON.

 

[galumay]

Look out Rebels!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk