2-man: who's watching for BI and GT?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Even JR would admit there's the possibility of it not being a try; but the odds of an official making that call and not becoming "that guy" are slim.

It IS true that it IS always considered a try for goal. It is also true that the rules don't really support that universally-made decision to always consider it as a try.

JR has admitted that there sureasheck is a possibility of it not being a try by rule(but NOT by common practice) to Billy constantly until JR screamed and threatened great bodily harm if Billy brought it up again.

And the "slim" estimate is too high also imo. Put it under "career ending maybe".

Just Billy being bitter.....

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It is also true that the rules don't really support that universally-made decision to always consider it as a try.
JR has admitted that there sureasheck is a possibility of it not being a try by rule.

Bingo. Now let's all go over and pay 60 Seconds On Officiating a visit. I've got my pitchfork. Bring your shovel.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bingo. Now let's all go over and pay 60 Seconds On Officiating a visit.

Bin der...dun dat......hopefully pissed 'em off at the same time.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It IS true that it IS always considered a try for goal. It is also true that the rules don't really support that universally-made decision to always consider it as a try.

JR has admitted that there sureasheck is a possibility of it not being a try by rule(but NOT by common practice) to Billy constantly until JR screamed and threatened great bodily harm if Billy brought it up again.

And the "slim" estimate is too high also imo. Put it under "career ending maybe".

Just Billy being bitter.....

And if Eastshire is listening; this is the difference between a test answer and a practical answer.