been pushed". Should have been a penalty either way.

=#8000FFThere's a case for Brown being in the act of scoring, but isn't it denying a clear try scoring opportunity like a tackle off the ball when the player would have reached the ball?

Just read the rules. The Hodgson one wasn't guaranteed to score, therefore, penalty. There's certainly a case for the offence on Brown to be given as one but very sketchy in my opinion.

Galea was going for the ball though and so long as both players are going in the same direction I dont see a problem with it. Brown knocked on and there is no 100% certain that given Galea not diving that Brown would have scored anyway.



Again Hodgson, no way a penalty try. I have seen much more obvious ones not given so for me its a no on this one. Again its not 100% certain he would have scored. At the speed he was going, if Fox had waited until Hodgson had hit the ground then there is a slim possibility he may have been able to push him out or dislodge the ball? Small chance i know but a penalty try has to be 100% certain he would have scored - neither of these were for mine (first one was right call and not even a penalty anyway)

Attempt or not, the fact he went through the man to even gain that opportunity of getting the ball is wrong. Had he tried to come round Brown and swipe at it, fair enough, I could see your point. It's just one of those decisions though and if it had been any of our own sides we'd be saying it's correct decision so no qualms really.

How did you work that out?



Hodgson caught the ball cleanly and had it in his possession. He was moving towards and would have landed over the tryline. Without Fox's interference, what would have stopped him grounding it? Nothing. No-one. If that's not someone in the act of scoring I don't know what is.



Fox tackled him illegally in the air and pushed him into the flag and out of play.



World Cup Final. Hohaia was not in the act of scoring - he wasn't even in possession of the ball but just chasing it down and was taken out on the goal line, a distance from the ball. Hodgson, on the other hand, had the ball in his hands and was travelling over the goal line to score until taken out illegally.

You could argue that Fox could have gave Hodgson space and either secured the ball from being grounded or could have been pushed into touch as soon as his feet touched the ground.

Do you really think that?

You could argue Hohaia might have tripped. That's not the point. Remove Fox from the equation and Hodgson scores. Simple as that.

Morgan,Brown & Matterson all said they believe you can tackle the attacking player in the air. Thats 3 SL coaches that believe that interpretation of the rule. As Matterson said what are you meant to do let the Attacking player catch the ball and just put the ball down. If you can tackle the ATTACKING player in the air then it was never a penalty and Hull KR should have won.



I'll admit i aint got a clue whether you can or can't. Anybody actually know this 100%

Look closely at Hodgson putting the ball down. He's in touch but that wouldn't have happened hadn't Fox tackled him BUT didn't he fail to ground the ball correctly. That could have happened with or without fox.

=#8000FFMatterson is a clueless buffoon, Brown was coaching in the NRL where you COULD tackle the attacking player in the air and Morgan well he was trying to find an excuse. In the NRL you could/can tackle the attacker in the air, in SL you've never been able to.