**** Ref....Alain Rolland ( ....Grrr'' Sick as the proverbial frigging parrot....Ohh well a good result for us against Burnley i reckon.... (clap) .... Leeds seem to be on a roll aswell.... .... And before such folk as Eastander, get on their high horse, in saying this is a footy forum, so **** of to a Rugby one, i've done that aswell....so (kissmyass) .... I'm off .... (pint) ....There is life after a downfall....
Use the earlier photo Foot on the line prior to the ball grounded</p> http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44188000/jpg/_44188781_cueto300.jpg</p>
Have you got that one? I've not seen it yet. Even if that decision was correct, and if it was then all credit to the video ref, I think the two crossing decisions were pretty blatant and should have been given by the actual game ref. And there was that strange penalty given against us when the guy was adjudged to have broken clear when he was still clearly bound onto the back of the guys in front of him. As I said yesterday I still reckon that SA would have won, and deservedly at that, but it would have been more of a spectacle if we'd have been within a converted try in the closing stages and but for a few poor decisions I believe we would have been.
RE: Have you got that one? Link there....tried attaching it but I never seem to be able to do it with the rich text, seems to hang on my ancient pc! Didn't watch the game....was chatting online....I put the game on when people were debating it and saw the replays...before the video ref ruled it out I called it as a dead ball before it was grounded.
Interesting I'm not sure that's 100% conclusive either but I think there's enough doubt that you'd have to go with the defending team. Was a shame Tait didn't quite manage to take it all the way - that would have been a hell of a try. I stand by my comments re: the decisions from the match ref, though. Pending video evidence to the contrary, of course.
