Watching the replay it was obvious how much Vegas played on our minds for the first 15-20mins. We looked to cautious afraid to make a mistake and when Manly scored it started to look like De Ja Vu, had they scored one of their bombed tries or gone for the try instead of the 2 it probably would have been enough for them to go on with it the way both teams were playing.
Luckily Manly did make those costly mistakes and it was like a switch turned on once we got that first try and we were a different team- the proverbial monkey was off our back.
As for the contentious calls… as a fan base we are quick to jump on the defensive and see every wrong as part of a great conspiracy against us, now I am just as guilty as the rest in the heat of the moment. However, when looking at them a bit more objectively;
Saab try- yeah he dropped it BUT had a finger in contact when the ball was on the line- people are talking “downward pressure” and “control”, which he had none, as not the current rules. Although didn’t deserve a try it couldn’t be taken away under the current rules.
DCE try was pretty bloody close and I thought I saw the foot touch the line, the is one frame where it’s a bit more in question. Onus is on the bunker to prove it’s NOT a try- which they couldn’t conclusively do.
This seems to be the Manly fan consensus and if we are being honest we’d likely sing the same tune if we had scored those.
From the other side there has been complaints about 3 of our tries too;
Taines try there’s claims of obstruction-general consensus is there isn’t.
Evan’s try there’s claims of held up- think he got it down on the initial attempt but it’s close enough to have a look but didn’t seem to get any scrutiny.
RTS try there’s a bit of a case for a double movement but I think momentum from the tackler which would have gotten him there anyway. One thing not scrutinised but saw from a Manly fan is that
CHT puts a foot out and trips DCE which causes the space for
RTS to go through. Looks like a collision at first look but it looks like cht intended to do it.
All I’m saying is that whilst we obviously get aggrieved at what doesn’t go or way- calls go both ways.
Manly seem to be more aggrieved about the lopsided 6 again count, whilst I doubt we were saints I’m glad this wasn’t artificially evened out to pad the stats and it did seem a deliberate Manly tactic to concede a 6 again after a break or error on the first to give their line a better chance to reset. There was a stage after the binning where it did shift into taking the piss territory where u could see them breaking when our guy stood to play the ball and by the time dummy half had it they were almost in our backline.
All in all a deserved win but we need to back it up now, all it took was a couple of crucial sliding doors moments from being a Manly hiding.
)
