General NRL Discussion

The defender forfeits any claim to obstruction when he attempts to tackle the decoy. Which is what JWH did. That was not bracing, nor was it an attempt to get around him. He sunk the shoulder in. I don't care what James did before that or whether it was inside shoulder or outside shoulder. It was a defensive decision.

Stop talking out of your arse.

 

lol he attempts to accentuate an interference because he realised he'd hit a bloke without the ball.

This happens after he initiates contact. If he doesn't initiate contact in a defensive action, there is no doubt. He initiates contact in a defensive manner, and therefore he forfeits the claim to denied opportunity. He forfeits, more importantly, the presumption (benefit of the doubt) that he actually made a correct read and intended to slide out.

Your mentality gives carte blanche to defenders, plain and simple. By that standard, any decoy hitting the outside shoulder who would've run through the line or stopped a metre before it, can be hit on suspicion and then still be used as justification for an obstruction penalty. No way. You can't have both.

If he runs into James, if he braces, if he gets knocked over, if he attempts to get around the decoy; any one or any combination of these and he gets the penalty. That's not what he did.

 

Most of what you've said is just simply irrelevant. The only question is was he bracing or was he tackling. The reverse angle shows he leads with the point of his shoulder. Hardly bracing.

The video referee didn't seem the slightest bit concerned with who initiated contact. All he said was "James hits outside shoulder, JWH obstructed......"

lol okay. Is that how it is now?

 

Love this superfluous addition.

 

Goddard/Johns. Fixed. lol