Main content

Official View: Origin III

Stuart Raper & Bill Harrigan NRL.com Thu, Jul 05, 2012 - 6:00 PM

Bill Harrigan and Stuart Raper answers your questions from State of origin III Copyright: NRL Photos

Referees co-coaches Stuart Raper and Bill Harrigan answer your most frequently asked questions from the State of Origin decider.

What is your official stance on the Justin Hodges try in the first-half,  is it an obstruction?

In 2011 we added an important clause to the interpretations around obstruction plays.

The change was that: “If in the opinion of the referee or video referee the play had no effect on the scoring of a try then a try will be awarded.”

The reason for this change was that the obstruction rule had become so technical that tries were being disallowed when they shouldn’t have been.

There remain a number of indicators that referees should look for in determining if an obstruction has taken place but the over-riding one they must consider is whether a player actually had an effect on the try being scored.

In this case both video referees believed that Beau Scott wasn’t impeded by Ben Hannant’s decoy run and that Robbie Farah had minimal contact which did not alter the outcome.

Both video referees formed the view therefore that the player did not have an effect on the scoring of the try.

Having reviewed the footage today we support that position.

What were your thoughts on the decision to penalise NSW forward Tim Grant after it appeared Queensland winger Brent Tate had thrown a punch?

The initial incident was a high shot from Tim Grant on Brent Tate. That is where the matter started and that is why the penalty went against NSW.