View Full Version : My mark crossed the line- Matthew Richardson
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/1,9191,23571266-19742,00.html
RICHMOND spearhead Matthew Richardson yesterday admitted he had marked Daniel Giansiracusa's second-term shot at goal well over the goal-line.
The shot eight minutes into the term looked up to half a metre over the line but was called a mark by the goal umpire, in a game that ended in a dramatic draw.
It was one of a host of incidents that could have changed the course of the match, and will again reignite debate about technology in goal-line decisions.
While all of the ball must cross the goal-line before an umpire awards a goal, there have been a raft of decisions in recent years that have confused fans and players.
Richardson told the Herald Sun last night the ball was over the line when he marked it.
"I thought it was over, but you have to try to act your way through it," Richardson said.
"I thought it was maybe just through but you take the good with the bad and sometimes you get decisions that go your way and other times you don't."
Richardson again lined up on the wing and was excellent, but his opponent Brian Lake was instrumental in last few minutes.
He pushed forward and marked in the last minute to help the Dogs secure a draw, and Richardson said he had been unable to spoil him in the huge pack that formed.
"I probably should have come third man in, but I just lost the flight of the ball a bit which is disappointing, but that's footy," Richardson said.
"We didn't cope with the last few minutes. We did a few things we wouldn't normally want to do in that situation. We didn't hold on to the ball and made a few errors defensively, which cost us.
"I didn't lay a tackle on (Robert) Murphy and Harris (Lake) took a good contested mark and we needed to spoil that. But we did a lot of things right so we can't think it's all doom and gloom."
The debate ends, it was a goal
Dogs Rule
21 Apr 2008, 02:04
Disgraceful. Absolutely disgraceful.
As is the crap in today's papers about Wallace claiming Lake faked his injury.
Pathetic.
Well, if it's any consolation. It's 2 points instead of none and Richo admitted the mark was wrong to have been paid.
It was a horrid break you guys got.
delirious1
21 Apr 2008, 02:30
Well good for Richo for trying to save the goal
Goal umpire will have some explaining to do
2007tiger
21 Apr 2008, 11:07
The entire match was full of bad umpiring, for both teams. They were consistantly bad. At one point the goal umpire awarded a point and the field umpire had to tell her it had hit the behind post. We could go on and on..............
campbell
21 Apr 2008, 11:36
I watched only part of the match on a break at work. The doggies were not playing well when I watched, but all those 50/50 ones went against you.
2 point sis better than what it was looking like at some stages. BUT....
TedDougChris
21 Apr 2008, 11:38
Well, if it's any consolation. It's 2 points instead of none and Richo admitted the mark was wrong to have been paid.
It was a horrid break you guys got.
Particularly as Richmond went straight down and kicked a goal at the other end. A 2 goal swing as they say....
JorgePosada
21 Apr 2008, 11:57
The incident in isolation cost us the game, but in the bigger picture, it was just one of many chances.
The goal umpire should be dropped for the next round. He must have been influenced by the Richmond Cheer Squad behind him. Must've been a good metre over the line!
Well how many other players try and claim the mark going over the line? Most don't get away with it but most times they claim it. How many players dive for free kicks? It happens countless times in each game.
I don't blame Richo for it, I would have done the same thing if I was in his situation I'm sure most others in here would have too. The umpires made the mistake in the end.
barkly st.
21 Apr 2008, 13:21
Happens to the dogs and we just have to shrug our shoulders and say oh well.
I'm certain some of the more powerful clubs would have a more rabid response with rule changes, executions, cameras and micro chipped footballs being called for.
westdog54
21 Apr 2008, 13:32
Happens to the dogs and we just have to shrug our shoulders and say oh well.
I'm certain some of the more powerful clubs would have a more rabid response with rule changes, executions, cameras and micro chipped footballs being called for.
I wouldn't say we have to say "oh well". I'd like to think we choose to.
Yes, we we on the end of a very poor decision. But at the end of the day, that's sport. It happens.
Bulldogs Roar
21 Apr 2008, 13:45
Your a cheat richo, you knew it crossed the line and said nothing!
turtle27
21 Apr 2008, 13:50
Your a cheat richo, you knew it crossed the line and said nothing!You're joking aren't you? Would you actually expect an AFL footballer, or any footballer for that matter, to put their hand up and say it was a goal? If it was Minson, Cross, or Murphy, that took the mark, and they then persuaded the Goal and Field umps it was a goal, what you say?
Bulldogs Roar
21 Apr 2008, 13:59
You're joking aren't you? Would you actually expect an AFL footballer, or any footballer for that matter, to put their hand up and say it was a goal? If it was Minson, Cross, or Murphy, that took the mark, and they then persuaded the Goal and Field umps it was a goal, what you say?
Fair point, i would have done exactly what richo did, but i wouldn't come ou the next day and dilberatley said "yeah i knew it was across the line, and i cheated".
Thats the difference. Count yourself lucky.
dont bowl there
21 Apr 2008, 14:11
Fair point, i would have done exactly what richo did, but i wouldn't come ou the next day and dilberatley said "yeah i knew it was across the line, and i cheated".
Thats the difference. Count yourself lucky.
How is it cheating? In all honesty the Bulldogs should be the team that is "counting themselves lucky", you were outplayed for most of the match.
always right
21 Apr 2008, 14:23
Fair point, i would have done exactly what richo did, but i wouldn't come ou the next day and dilberatley said "yeah i knew it was across the line, and i cheated".
Thats the difference. Count yourself lucky.
Oh pleeeease. Get off your high horse. Richo admits the ball was across the line. Admits he was lucky to get away with it. Good on him. Drop the goal umpire next week but leave Richo alone. I love the guy.
P-MONEY
21 Apr 2008, 14:25
OHHH the best free kick was when Addison jumped on the ball, then all the richmond players jump onto of him to pull in the ball and get a holding the ball free kick.
Addison got up (STANDING) from under the pack and while he was STANDING the umpire called
holding the ball/pulling it in ??????????????????????????????????
How can you want to watch a sport like that?
Result = Free kick = Goal..
always right
21 Apr 2008, 14:28
OHHH the best free kick was when Addison jumped on the ball, then all the richmond players jump onto of him to pull in the ball and get a holding the ball free kick.
Addison got up (STANDING) from under the pack and while he was STANDING the umpire called
holding the ball/pulling it in ??????????????????????????????????
How can you want to watch a sport like that?
Result = Free kick = Goal..
Whoah.....where did that spray come from?:D
westdog54
21 Apr 2008, 15:03
How is it cheating? In all honesty the Bulldogs should be the team that is "counting themselves lucky", you were outplayed for most of the match.
I think you'll find most bulldog supporters agree with you here
Oh pleeeease. Get off your high horse. Richo admits the ball was across the line. Admits he was lucky to get away with it. Good on him. Drop the goal umpire next week but leave Richo alone. I love the guy.
Agreed. 100%
Chicago1
21 Apr 2008, 15:12
Hey, even I know that what Richo did was totally legitimate! Any player worth his salt would try the same thing. It's the umpire's fault about the goal, not Richo's. I'd be disappointed if any of our players didn't try to pull one over on the umps. It all evens out in the end. I'm just surprised we managed to end up drawing. That tells me something about the character of our players.
Hey, even I know that what Richo did was totally legitimate! Any player worth his salt would try the same thing. It's the umpire's fault about the goal, not Richo's. I'd be disappointed if any of our players didn't try to pull one over on the umps. It all evens out in the end. I'm just surprised we managed to end up drawing. That tells me something about the character of our players.
CHARACTER?
they didn't have any in the whole match, but u are appplauding the three goals in three minutes. we were very lucky and didn't really deserve anything let alone a draw.
P-MONEY
21 Apr 2008, 15:32
Whoah.....where did that spray come from?:D
Little dramatic i know.. But pissed me right off..
Dogs_R_Us
21 Apr 2008, 15:42
As has been said by several, the umpire was at fault, not Richo, who only did what any player wanting to win the game would do, legitimately.
Knowing that, it's a bit rich for Wallet to whinge about Brian not taking his kick. He was only doing what he legitimately was able to do, to try to win the game for us. Again the umps tried to stop us, by picking a player they thought wouldn't be able to kick the goal. :thumbsd:
always right
21 Apr 2008, 16:01
CHARACTER?
they didn't have any in the whole match, but u are appplauding the three goals in three minutes. we were very lucky and didn't really deserve anything let alone a draw.
Happy to give them a spray for the majority of the match but also happy to give them some credit for fighting the game out and almost coming away with a win. If they had laid down the last four minutes and it was Richmond who kicked the last three goals, you would have been carrying on how they had given up.
Chicago1
21 Apr 2008, 16:04
CHARACTER?
they didn't have any in the whole match, but u are appplauding the three goals in three minutes. we were very lucky and didn't really deserve anything let alone a draw.
Of course it is. Most of our teams from the past few years and even thirty years ago would have chucked it in being 25 points behind at that stage of the last quarter and we would have lost by more. I'll take a draw after playing badly for most of the afternoon to the alternative. Not many, not even the one eyed Doggie supporters on here, would have imagined us to be without a loss at this stage of the year. In theory we should have beaten Richmond, but not everything is black and white. At least we're heading in the right direction.
Richo is not to blame for the decision, any player in any league in Australia, of any standard would've claimed the mark.
The goal umpire has to get dropped, terrible decision.
It's hard to say it was the difference in the game as we missed plenty of easy chances in the 1st half to get a big lead, then Richmond had the chance to lock it up and win in the last 10 minutes, we were lucky in the end to get the draw, but should've won if we made the most of our opportunities earlier.
the red white and black
21 Apr 2008, 17:04
Fair point, i would have done exactly what richo did, but i wouldn't come ou the next day and dilberatley said "yeah i knew it was across the line, and i cheated".
Thats the difference. Count yourself lucky.
Didn't see you blokes jumping out of the stands to stop that eighty metre penalty Gilbee got.....and goaled. Game was a draw, get over it. Good decisions, bad decisions. Part of footy mate.;)
boydsno1
21 Apr 2008, 17:09
i like how people say we were out played. geez we kicked 4.10 to 4.2 early on. had welsh kicked straight including others we would have had a massive lead. tigers were lucky to even still be in the game upto halftime. anyways im not blameing the richo mark for the reason we drew. it was our poor accuracy in front of goal. but people calling lake a disgrace should piss off as richo admitted he knew it was a goal but still choose to claim it.
Palace03
21 Apr 2008, 17:12
How can anyone blame Richardson? Even if he said to the goal umpire it was a goal it would not have changed the goal umpires decision, he made a terrible mistake, there's nothing anyone can do now.
If we were switched on with our kicking for goal and our tackling and intensity from previous weeks was there we would have won easily, but it wasn't and we cost ourselves two points.
dont blame richo its the umpire who made the mistake and should be punished, sure it was a small incident but they get paid to do their job right
dont blame richo its the umpire who made the mistake and should be punished, sure it was a small incident but they get paid to do their job right
I actually agree with you. Umpires are supposed to make these decisions. We've been whinging about Libber's "goal" for 10 years. Every week players claim they have touched the ball off a player's boot. It's Sydney Test Australia v India all over again. Symonds was out, Richo was over the line, the umpires stuffed up both times. Let's move on.
#1 Dogs Fan
21 Apr 2008, 20:07
I don't give a ____ I hope we get rewarded that goal and the game that will never happen just to show Richo that being a smart ass about it isn't the way to go about it. ;)
Goal umpire Mark Harrison won the support of Gieschen for a decision in the second term of the Bulldogs-Richmond clash.
Tiger Matthew Richardson admitted he thought the ball was over the line when he marked a shot by Daniel Giansiracusa, but Gieschen said the video evidence was not as damning. "It's not as cut and dried," he said.
"There's one particular angle that I think people should probably have a look at.
"The whole of the ball has to cross the whole of the line, which includes the back of the padding."
Gieschen said no angle could conclusively reveal the ump got it wrong.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,23577940-19742,00.html
;)
ErnieSigley
22 Apr 2008, 10:37
Typical Gieschen. Umps never make a mistake.
Padding? You have to be kidding me. Is there are specific width the padding has to be?
The line should always be the indicator as its thinner that the post. There is no way the line is as thick as the padding
always right
22 Apr 2008, 12:35
I'm over it. 99 times out of 100 that would have been called a goal. On to next week.
Bulldogs Roar
22 Apr 2008, 13:25
Oh pleeeease. Get off your high horse. Richo admits the ball was across the line. Admits he was lucky to get away with it. Good on him. Drop the goal umpire next week but leave Richo alone. I love the guy.
Again, fair point you make and I realise that maybe richo wasn't totally to blame, however this is my personal opinion and I dont excepct other bulldogs supporters to back me up.
I like others think its time to move on as there is nothing you can do about it now.
stevebiscuit
22 Apr 2008, 15:45
"The whole of the ball has to cross the whole of the line, which includes the back of the padding."
Gieschen said no angle could conclusively reveal the ump got it wrong.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,23577940-19742,00.html
;)
This is why our game is becoming rubbish. So the ball must fully cross the back of the padding around the base of the goal post to be a goal - so that is why the actual goal line is painted on the ground from the middle of the posts. If this is the rule then why not paint the line at the back of the padding? Did he take the mark above the line of the padding? then it should be a goal surely - the line of the padding does not extend up into space? Stupid overly technical rules - cant things just be straight forward?
I mean how many times have you seen the ball just trickle over the line along the ground just before it has been touched by a player lunging at it? Had they gone beyond the back of the padding - stupidity!
ErnieSigley
22 Apr 2008, 16:32
This back of padding is just BS, they change it to suit their argument.
beyondthevalley ofthedogs
22 Apr 2008, 20:22
This back of padding is just BS, they change it to suit their argument.
I've never ever heard of that rule. If that's true then why the **** is there a line painted on the ground that in no way lines up with the padding.
Borgsta
22 Apr 2008, 20:32
It isn't a rule. Ball has to cross the line completely. It did.
Geisch will never admit a mistake unless there is 100% impossible to deny video evidence.....eg. Will not being closest. Even in that instance he excused the umpire because things are hectic.
It didn't cost us the game, our kicking did that.
The umpire however should be dropped.
johnmandiddy
25 Apr 2008, 11:00
It was a goal, but we shouldn't have to rely on it to beat Richmond.
No grudges whatsoever on Richo