A season of disappointment was left with more frustration for St George Illawarra as the NRL's head of football Graham Annesley defended the referee decision in Sunday's controversial loss to the Canberra Raiders.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
This time around it was the Dragons who were on the wrong end of a controversial two-point defeat, losing 24-22 in the nation's capital on Sunday to officially end their chances of playing finals football this season.
But unlike the round 16 fixture in Wollongong, where Annesley conceded Canberra were robbed the chance to at least draw level as Ben Hunt infringed three times in the final six seconds as the Dragons clung to a 12-10 lead, he backed "100 per cent" the call of officials in the dying stages of Sunday's game.
The drama unfolded after referee Adam Gee blew full-time despite protestations from Dragons players that Canberra tackler Corey Harawira-Naera did not release Mat Feagai quick enough, denying him the opportunity to play the ball in the last play of the day.
A penalty would have given Zac Lomax a very kickable chance to level the scores and send the game to golden point.
The referee however did not blow for a penalty and, having already burned their challenge earlier in the second half, the Dragons had no means of formal protest.
Annesley said even if the Dragons had not burnt their captain's challenge and challenged the call, the bunker would have had no choice but to deny the challenge.
He used audio from the timekeeper, referee and touch judges, as well as split-screen vision to show how time had expired and that Feagai dropped the ball as he tried to get up to play the ball.
"Both of those factors would have been reviewed by the bunker had they had a challenge left, and on both counts the challenge would have been rejected," Annesley said.
"The game would have still ended.
"If they played the ball before the time keeper said time, then I would have been here saying no the referee should have allowed play to continue. But in this case they are 100 per cent right in that the game finished at that point."
Annesley said the ball had to be in play at allow the game to restart.
"Regardless of any infringement that takes place by the defender, other than foul play, any technical infringement that may take place here is irrelevant because the ball hasn't been brought back into play, and the referee can't extend the play for a technical infringement to award a penalty," he said.
"At the time that the timekeeper says the game has expired you can see the second movement by Harawira-Naera is about to take place but time has expired. The referee blows the whistle to stop play, similar to what happens in the Wests Tigers incident.
"The difference with the Wests Tigers incident was that the ball was already in play when time expired. In this case it is not back in play and time has expired.
"When Feagai starts to get to his feet and Harawira-Naera is getting off him at this stage, Feagai has lost possession of the ball.
"Not only could we not have restarted play because the tackle had been complete before he restarted but we could not also restart because they had knocked on in the ruck."
We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say.
Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on the Illawarra Mercury website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. Sign up for a subscription here.
To read more stories, download the Illawarra Mercury news app in the Apple Store or Google Play.
Sign up to our breaking news emails