THAT was NOT a TRY?

Question

I'm rooting for Wales but that last call was total bullshit. Whats the point in having video replays if they don't follow the rules anyway?

Answer 1

Hey there. I think the video ref had a  tough decision to make then. I think if they had a birds eye view they would have had a change to say yes or no for defo.

Come on wales all the way

Whats done is done - we still WON COME ON WALES

Answer 2

Skywise is bang on.

Answer 3

No it wasn't, but it made no difference to the outcome.

But did anyone notice that the Scottish players and coaching staff accepted the decision without question like the gentlemen they are. Not like soccer pansy poofters who would have been running around like headless chickens whingeing and whining.

Answer 4

Of course it was a try?

Answer 5

Definately not a try...but Scotland really disappointed me and seemed to have some sort of templated forward game..they bought off the shelf..They don't deserve anything playing like that.

Sorry...best luck for the rest of the championship..and please beat England..

Answer 6

It made no difference to the result but it deserved to be a try....his foot did not touch the line...it MIGHT have touched inside the line but the judge decided not....that's what they're there for.

Answer 7

Hmm, I dont know.  When they go to the TMO, are they trying to see if there is enough evidence to overturn a try OR are they trying to see if there is enough evidence to award the try?  I am asking because over here in American football, the review of the "Instant Replay" must show "indisputable visual evidence" to OVERTURN the call.

This is a minor distinction, but if it is the former of those two aformentioned methods, it's not totally conclusive that Williams's foot clipped the line (he could have kicked up turf from just inside the line).  If it's the latter, then the TMO made a mistake and should be fired from his job.  

Either way, I wagered that Williams would score 2 tries and the score would be 31-13, so I am happy.

Answer 8

im welsh but have to agree but it`s 2 late now

Answer 9

I agree it wasn't a try, how silly are these people!

Answer 10

OK It was Not a Try !!!

But lets not start doing an England and arguing the toss for the next four years!!!!!!

Its been given, its history !

Wales have Won!!!!

Disputing that not try! for how ever long you want to ain't gonna change the result!!!

Answer 11

It wouldn't have made any difference we would have won anyway, Grand slam and triple crown here we go, .

Answer 12

I honestly think that it WAS a try.

Shane's foot did not touch the line.  

The only reason they might possibly have had to disallow was that from one angle it looked as though his thigh mght have touched the flag befire he grounded the ball.

We'll take it anyway - it's about time some of these 50/50 calls start to go our way.

Answer 13

I agree. That was so obviously not a try it is ridiculous. I'm supporting Scotland, but even if i was supporting Wales I'd still say that wasn't a try. It is preposterous. :\

Answer 14

Personally I don't think it was a try, but I wasn't the ref. It was d**n close and was awarded, so there's nothing we can do about it.

Refs are not perfect, it's not the first time they have got it wrong, and it won't be the last.

Whether or not it was wouldn't make any difference to the result of the game.

We won. End of story.

Da iawn bois. Keep it up.

CYMRU AM BYTH!!!

Answer 15

In answer to CW -

When refs go to the TMO, there are 2 distinct questions that they can ask

1. Was that a try, yes or no? (for when the ref is not sure either way)

or

2. Is there any reason why a try cannot be awarded? (for when the ref wants to award a try unless there is evidence to the contrary)

Answer 16

It was not a try.............

As much as I love Wales and want them to win and my son said "who cares?"

I care!

That was NOT a try............

WTF is a point of a TMO if he does not do his job???????