You're so bitter Craig.



But anyway, it was offside, whether anyone agrees with the rule or not.

Hull had one disallowed earlier this season for exactly the same offence, where Tuimavave didn't give the player catching the kick 10 yards, the player spilt it, Sneyd (I think) picked it up and scored, but disallowed despite Tuimavave not really being involved.

To the guy who says 'folk should be kept updated on rule changes', we are. Full rules are available on the rugbyleague site, and any changes for the forthcoming season are announced each year (and discussed on RLFans usually). What else do you want, Nigel Wood to come to your house personally to sit down and explain them to you?

It wasn't actually sent up for offside either, was looking for the knock on! That's why he gave no try on the field.

Unfortunately there's another section;
"Interfering with the catcher. Any off side player who remains within ten metres of an opponent who is set to catch a kick up field by an opposing player shall be deemed to be interfering with or attempting to interfere with the catcher and shall be penalised unless the non-offending team gains an immediate advantage."
That seems to imply that he can't be played onside by the kicker running ahead of him.

even without the disallowed try, with more composure 10M out we could have and should have won comfortably. Good performance. Bring on next season. Lets not forget where we where at just over a year ago.

Either the kicker plays him onside or he doesn't. The rules state that he does so he cannot be onside and offside at the same time.

"Any offside player..."

A player who is played onside is not an offside player!

Correct.

Tbf the eef was crap for both teams

Seems clear enough to me. He was deemed offside from when the kick was made until he was played back onside. During that time when he was offside he was deemed to have interfered with the receiving player by encroaching within 10 metres.

To be fair this thread isn't about the ref (Campbell) it's about the video ref Bentham...

You can excuse ref errors through the game as it's quick and so much is going on....sitting watching video replays and not knowing basic rules is inexcusable though!

How did Bentham determine that Finn was within 10 metres of the defender? No one else picked up the offside, so no referral from the ref or linesmen.

It all looked pretty marginal to me.

This.

As much as it might grate once Bentham had decided (probably just about correctly, albeit close) that Finn was in front of kicker and within 10 metres of Shaul at the point of challenge then he had to call it offside. The decision was correct.

Finn was never within 10 metres of Shaul...watch the replay when the kick goes up he is over 10 metres away...as far as I can see at no point is he offside within 10 metres...Hall goes past him and he is onside...

It is not when the kick goes up, it is when it comes down at the point of challenge and at that point he was less than 10 metres away. So as he was in front of Hall when he kicked it he is offside.

How can he be played onside by Hall as he runs past him, then be offside when Hall is jumping in the air to challenge for the ball?

Soon as Hall passes players and gets to the ball they are triggered on side, try end of.

Wrong.

Ok

One last time. As he was in front of the kicker Finn would have only have been placed onside by Hall running through if he had remained 10 metres away from Shaul at the point the ball was challenged for. He didn't, he encroached within that. It matters not that Hall touched the ball first. So it is no try as much as we might want it to be. It is very much a crap rule but a rule all the same.

As soon as Hall goes past Finn he is 'back onside'...Hall went past him before he got within 10 metres of Shaul so it should have been a try! The end!

It doesn't. It applies only to offside players, which Finn ceased to be once Hall played him onside. That was the point Cummings was making, that he can't be played onside within ten metres of the catcher, as by then he's already committed the infringement, but Finn was played onside a long time before then. He got it wrong.

Finn was within 10m before Hall passed him. At that point he can't be played onside.

It's a daft rule and it cost us a crucial try earlier in the season. I guess this was a swings and roundabouts moment.

Just looked at the video to check this and no way was Finn within 10 m of defender when the kick went up. If Bentham deems he was within 10 when kick came down Id like to know how he measured that cause it looked marginal at best and was not reported by either ref or linesmen

Finn was within 10 metres, when! What footage are you watching?

When the kick goes up Finn is a couple of metres in front of the line and Shaul is in between two lines so around 13 metres...Hall takes about two strides to go past Finn who is never within 10 metres (while in front of Hall)..not seen Hull one from earlier in season so can't comment...

Thats the contentious bit thats causing the debate. Was Finn always within 10 after Hall had passed or was he outside then encroached afterwards? I originally thought he was always within the 10 which makes it no try, now having just looked again i'm not so sure! He might just have been those 10 metres away as he passed you know!