before we all get high and mighty about Maguire taking out Carmont last week

in the 2nd half one of our players took out a HKR player when they broke down the middle. nothing was given

Not sure who our player or the KR player was

Yep, it was brought in a few years ago after I think IIRC Bradford conceded a penalty try after stealing the ball 2 on 1 in the in-goal. The rule then changed to that if the ball was stolen it would be a simple penalty and not a penalty try. And at the time Phil Clarke and the Sky commentary team were in favour of the change in the rules.

As clear a case for a penalty try as there will ever be, but it didnt affect the game, so its potentially something to be discussed down the track.

I didnt mean it like that, i meant that was just as bad but he wont get a world of abuse like Maguire did. I believe maguire last week just did whatever he had to, i would hope our player would do the same.

no problem appreciate what you are saying, and I boooood maguire with everything I had last week

the 2 things imo are completely different, but from what is being said, he is ok to do that if someone is in the act of scoring

i must admit I dont get it, it is quite clearly denying a clear try scoring opportunity

Without doubt its something that needs sorting out because that time he did stop a certain try and it may cost somebody a game sometime and it will kick off big style. Imagine if that happens in the GF and theres a few minutes left and the team dont score off the penalty? The poo will hit the fan!

as long as next time the same decision is made, i think most fans would be happy

But we are talking about the RFL, so I would stake my life on that next week we would see a different decision

Never a penalty try in a million years - but every teams fans would be calling for one just the same.

Are some people just not reading the thread, or are they just disregarding it? The rule has been explained, their was no cheating involved by anyone as the defender was playing to the rules of the game!

If he was playing to the rules it wouldnt of been a penalty would it?

He was not certain to score, for me he was coming up short. 6 inch up the field it had to be a penalty try but right call for me.

He is ALLOWED to attack the ball with the knowledge that he will concede a penalty and not a penalty try as was the case years ago. That was the rule brought in due the the aforementioned squabble a few years back, as the fact is that defenders almost always put hands on the ball during the act of scoring, because what else are they meant to do in that situation? The ball rarely comes free, however.

Therefore, the emphasis is on the try scorer to ensure he gets it down. If Goulding keeps greater control of the ball, he scores, simple as that.

The rule was brought in IIRC to give defenders a fair shot as if they stopped ball being grounded twisted man up and then attacker just let go what do you give? Ball steals can be debatable enough as it is and otherwise do you just let them ground it? Rule makes sense IMO!

Surely that will ruin the game. Maybe our player did the same because he thought if Maguire can get away with it, well why not? I think it might been TL who did it this week but he actually had the chance to do so last week and it would have prevented a score. You could see he was thinking about it but he didn't actually do it (last week).

IMO taking out players in support off the ball needs to be stamped out before it becomes the norm or it will ruin the spectacle off good support play.

Dave

After one loss ... jeez you're fickle, Maguire has had a great first season in charge.

_________

Re - Goulding being awarded a penalty and not a penalty try.

You probably won't listen (nobody has so far) but here goes: the law/interpretation was altered after this incident at Odsal on the 2nd September 2007 - [i'Just five minutes into the second-half Rob Burrow's pass supplied Danny McGuire; he was halted just short, but managed to offload to Matt Diskin, who dived over. Referee Phil Bentham put the square in the air and video judge Richard Silverwood ruled full-back Michael Platt had stolen the ball, with Glenn Morrison also involved in the tackle. A penalty try was the correct decision, though there wasn't a lot else Platt could have done in the circumstances.' [/i Extract taken from the YEP match report.

Phil Clarke (who else) led the calls claiming it has to be legitimate for defenders to try and prevent a try in that circumstance. The RFL seemingly agreed and introduced the new interpretation for the beginning of the following season (200icon_cool.gif and as far as I know it has remained unaltered ever since.

I think this incident involved Sam, but it looked to be a tangle of legs from both players causing them both to fall over. I [uTHINK[/u that is why a penalty wasn't given.

It was Fox and he wasnt taken out he just tripped over his own feet hence why nothing was given.

It was fox, he was pulled back by tompkins and their feet did tangle and bring down fox, it much the same way as mcguire did last week, the only difference was tompkins didnt damage his leg in the process and hang onto fox for as long

I thought the no-penalty-try rule was only in force in the in-goal area, not in the field of play? I may be mis-remembering, but that's my recollection of it. That strip was in the field of play, not the in-goal.

So their feet tangled? It was an accident then..

Or are you accusing Tomkins (no P) of tripping along with everything else he supposedly does?

Not seen the replay BUT!

Watching at the game I though Tomkins did pull his shirt slightly and as they crossed their legs tangled, not quite as blatant as last week, but still should have been a penalty.

FWIW

I have no arguments with what mcguire did last week, it was a penalty, nothing more (Well maybe 10 mins if it had actually mattered i.e 10 mins earlier) and certainly didn't warrant the torrent of garbage spouted by our fans resulting in a torrent of garbage back by other teams fans.

I'm fairly sure this was one of the small changes they made to the rules last year, can't get a penalty try for ball steal over line, but it is a penalty, is it not a professional foul though, would it not be worthy of 10mins in bin as he knew full well what he was doing or is that slightly harsh?

Totally agree Dave. Its just while the rules are like they are people will take the risk as it probably pays off most times.

One Hull KR player took Richards out off the ball last night too, cant remember who it was though.

How can he be allowed to do something if it results in a penalty though? Surely the penalty is there to discourage them from doing it?