was it a try?

[AndyMcNabFAN]

No try. Even after reveiwing it with the IRB, Dickinson and the IRB were 100% sure the correct descision was taken. Not try.

Besides, if everyone is nagging about the try not being scored, why not nag about Toby Flood's cowardly push in Percy Montgomery's back to send him into a camera over the advertising barrier? Lucky not to get a yellow.

 

[fcukernaut]

 

[feicarsinn]

yeah none of thos pics show the moment when his foot passes the line so theyre pretty useless

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

Was talking to my Dad about this incident today, and we came to the conclusion that Jason Robinson would have scored the try.

Had Cueto done the Robinson slide (a la the 2003 final), then he would almost certainly have touched the line with the ball before his feet got anywhere near the touchline.

Could put it down to poor finishing.

 

[DC]

the second picture his toe is in touch..or at least a few inches off at that particular time

and i agree if he did the robbo slide he probably would have scored it successfully.

 

[Bullitt]

Was talking to my Dad about this incident today, and we came to the conclusion that Jason Robinson would have scored the try.

Had Cueto done the Robinson slide (a la the 2003 final), then he would almost certainly have touched the line with the ball before his feet got anywhere near the touchline.

Could put it down to poor finishing. [/b]

^^
Shows how useles the Manc muppet is.

Still, people will argue till their blue in the fae even though the replays clearly show his foot on the line (much as I didn't want to believe it at the time).

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/257BZOygfRY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/257BZOygfRY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

The 1:41 remaining mark clearly shows his foot on the line before the ball is grounded. Briefly, but it definately touched the line.

Still the conversation can always continue for for a good old fashioned bit of traditional pom bashing and typically arrogant English responces.

 

[DC]

yep 1 41 left is about when i'd say he definately had his foot on the touch line

very very close indeed

 

[diehardkiwi07]

[/b]

This pic is inconclusive..* REASON * His foot had already being over the line but the pic is taken when his foot is raised therefore your only looking at the ball grounded atferward NO TRY!

Stop moaning about it or your sound like kiwis moaning about the french foward pass :ranting:

 

[Aeros]

Yup. You can see the spot on the touchline (look just below his foot in the pic above) where his foot touched before he touched the ball down, too.

 

[fcukernaut]

<div class='quotemain'>[/b]

This pic is inconclusive..* REASON * His foot had already being over the line but the pic is taken when his foot is raised therefore your only looking at the ball grounded atferward NO TRY!

Stop moaning about it or your sound like kiwis moaning about the french foward pass :ranting: [/b][/quote]



Well, firstly I am a New Zealander and I did whine about that forward pass. As such I have no bias as to whether the try was scored or not, I even called it no try as he put it down (new ambition in life is to be a TMO). What I was hoping in posting these pictures was that someone would connect this picture:

With this one:

But I then realized that this photo disproves the thought that the scruff in the line is from the SA player:

 

[chopper128]

Having seen the evidence (take a look at a freeze frame in the RWC Final thread, I think), it definitely wasn't a try.

South Africa were the better side, didn't commit as many errors as we did and were able to beat us at our own game. It wasn't a pretty final (both teams have to take the blame for that) but overall, the best team in the tournament won. Congratulations Springboks.
[/b]

we are in full agreement

 

[ak47]

awesome

this is awesome

rugby has its version of the hand of god

history was made, and the debate will never end - its good for the game

i

 

[ak47]

None of the video’s on this thread are conclusive enough as the quality is bent backwards into a 1980’s focus……….seriously its blurred and would require prescription glasses if we all saw the world in those eyes

The still shots are where its at in quality but the timing isn’t right

All would be solved in the game introduced benefit of the doubt

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=307912

I see this rule implemented going forward for the next RWC.

We have witnessed a monumental moment in international rugby, that will be talked about for decades to come.

I was watching, sreaming benefit of the doubt, benefit of the doubt â€" BRIAN O-DRISCOLL â€" B.O.D!!!!! â€" then I got a crash course that Union doesn’t support benefit of the doubt……..i sat there on my couch scratching my head thinking…………..jesus as if its not hard enough to score as it is.

We will always come to situations that is NOT black n white, clear cut mustard…no matter how good technology will be, we will always have a grey area â€" its time to introduce benefit of the doubt, to compromise these situations, to make way for a correct decision, not one that puts the TMO in a position to call on his interpretation, which will always differ to others, until ‘DOUBT’ can be used and called upon.

 

[Brodizzle]

That's all well and good but the thing is that there was NO doubt in the TMO's mind whether it was a try....he has come out and said so...so half your argument is void....

Not quite a hand of god incident though, it's just the English MEDIA bleating on, they will die down because I don't think any respectible English rugby fan would argue that it was a try after watching the evidence of the boot clearly touching the white line...

 

[candybum]

[/b]

thats got to be conclusive enough to end the debate?

 

[YKNGR]

I remember after the Quarter Finals people around the world used to call NZlanders chokers. Now its the other way around...

hypocritz? Try or not, it wouldnt change the result of the game. Nor there isnt going to be a possible rematch untill 4 years time. And can we not blame the ref (like EVERYONE said to us NZers).

it wasnt a try.

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

I remember after the Quarter Finals people around the world used to call NZlanders chokers. Now its the other way around...
[/b]

Eh? :huh:



South Africa won the thing, so they can't have choked.



And people were backing England to go out in the pool stage, so getting to the final and losing a hard fought match is hardly choking either.

 

[stormmaster1]

I just read that Dickenson didn't have frame by frame replay to look through, just realtime from different angles. well done him for getting it right.

 

[alpopa]

The pictures show it definitely wasn't a try. I thought the same watching the game live, but that's probably because I supported SA.

 

[QKXV]

It's time for me to admit the truth.

In 95 we had Suzie poison the All Blacks
In 07 we got the guy in charge of the whitewash drunk, the line is marginally skew....look closely.

Aaaah another rumour is born