Round 10: Reds v Force- Saturday April 29 @ Suncorp 7:35pm

[dusk]

This was also the first game where i saw Creighton actually take charge as the number 10. He was very solid that match, and was even performing well at 12 when JOC (James O'Connor) got taken off.

 

[Ignoto]

Dunno where you're pulling this bias card from the Ref.

The Force were lucky to not have someone binned in the repeated penalties for scrums, late in the second half, after the two obstruction calls, Jock was pushed out of the way as he tried to make a tackle on the chase.

The Wilson obstruction call was during a penalty advantage from memory and never went back after the try was disallowed.

Plenty of things went the Force way last night.

 

[farva]

Dunno where you're pulling this bias card from the Ref.

The Force were lucky to not have someone binned in the repeated penalties for scrums, late in the second half, after the two obstruction calls, Jock was pushed out of the way as he tried to make a tackle on the chase.

The Wilson obstruction call was during a penalty advantage from memory and never went back after the try was disallowed.

Plenty of things went the Force way last night.

I don’t think anyone is claiming a bias ref. I think the thought was inexperienced ref who had variable calls (sometimes let an offence go, other times penalised) which makes it tough to adapt to. This is an issue that both teams would face. Force are low on the ladder so get more new refs than some other teams. Need to win more to address that!

 

[Purce]

I'm surprised more hasn't been said about the Flook non try due obstruction.

To me and my understanding there wasn't any obstruction. Not sure how you can obstruct when running a support line from an onside position. Campbell can't just disappear nor should he have to stop and give way to a defender coming from the side/behind him.

Compare this to the incident Ignoto refers to above which happened about 15 mins later and the Force player deliberately changed his line from an off side position while Campbell is trying to affect a tackle from infront. Clearly obstructing his ability to make the tackle. That was 100% obstruction.

A real head scratcher for me. Maybe it's because the Reds were clearly the better team and won so it didn't impact the result.

 

[farva]

I'm surprised more hasn't been said about the Flook non try due obstruction.

To me and my understanding there wasn't any obstruction. Not sure how you can obstruct when running a support line from an onside position. Campbell can't just disappear nor should he have to stop and give way to a defender coming from the side/behind him.

Compare this to the incident Ignoto refers to above which happened about 15 mins later and the Force player deliberately changed his line from an off side position while Campbell is trying to affect a tackle from infront. Clearly obstructing his ability to make the tackle. That was 100% obstruction.

A real head scratcher for me. Maybe it's because the Reds were clearly the better team and won so it didn't impact the result.

But Campbell was in front of Flook so not in a supporting position and prevented a Force player making a tackle. Clear obstruction for me.
You can’t have blocking runners like NFL and that is what Campbell did.

 

[PhilClinton]

I'm surprised more hasn't been said about the Flook non try due obstruction.

To me and my understanding there wasn't any obstruction. Not sure how you can obstruct when running a support line from an onside position. Campbell can't just disappear nor should he have to stop and give way to a defender coming from the side/behind him.

Yeh I thought it was quite clearly a support line - for example if Flook went to pass to Campbell in that position and the Force player bumping into Campbell prevented him for catching the pass, I imagine the Force player would have been penalised for tackling him without the ball.

Quite clearly a different situation to a support player running through a line/in front of the attacking player and putting themselves in a position where they can't receive a pass and also obstruct the defender.

 

[farva]

Yeh I thought it was quite clearly a support line - for example if Flook went to pass to Campbell in that position and the Force player bumping into Campbell prevented him for catching the pass, I imagine the Force player would have been penalised for tackling him without the ball.

Quite clearly a different situation to a support player running through a line/in front of the attacking player and putting themselves in a position where they can't receive a pass and also obstruct the defender.

Campbell was in front of Flook, he could not receive a pass. He was not in a position to receive a pass, and stopped a Force player making a tackle. Its obstruction every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Im not sure why there is a question on this. You cant stand in front of your team mate and block defenders.

 

[LeCheese]

Campbell was in front of Flook, he could not receive a pass. He was not in a position to receive a pass, and stopped a Force player making a tackle. Its obstruction every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Im not sure why there is a question on this. You cant stand in front of your team mate and block defenders.

Looked at it again - Campbell overran it but checks his run quite substantially, and when the obstruction occurs, the two are pretty much dead in line; a 50/50 call.

I think the fact that none of the surrounding Force players, of which there were several, appealed for an obstruction is pretty telling.

 

[farva]

Looked at it again - Campbell overran it but checks his run quite substantially, and when the obstruction occurs, the two are pretty much dead in line; a 50/50 call.

I think the fact that none of the surrounding Force players, of which there were several, appealed for an obstruction is pretty telling.

If Flook had made the pass, it would have been called back as forward. Campbell checked his run but was in front still when the obstruction occurred (I just froze it a few times on my Stan feed - they wont let me screen shot so cant show the shot)..
Campbell had over run the play, and he impeded the Force players run while not in a position to support Flook.
None appealed, but that doesnt mean an obstruction did not occur. Im not convinced the Force player would have got there either, but you need to give him a chance.
Its a strange one to be making a stand on, I dont think it was controversial call in the slightest.

 

[liquor box]

You cant stand in front of your team mate and block defenders.

Unless you are standing in front of your 9 as he kicks the ball from a ruck.

 

[Sully]

I wasn't happy when it was called back, but I have no complaints about the decision. It could have gone either way.