Review Fremantle Get Done By Richmond by 15 Points

[gungho]

Was at the game. The loss is not the end of the world and the boys should learn from it.

Longmuir should have had someone on Bolton in the middle, and a defensive forward on Vlaustin. (Probably the only guy with the strength to go with him would have been Fyfe - who should have sacrificed his own game).

Let’s not forget we showed a lot of character to get back into that game - the 2019 Freo would have lost it by 6 goals.

We are never good in wet weather but are tracking well for success in the next few years.

 

[Nothing]

Good question, might ask "has the ump stuffed up" on twitter

Whole of the ball has to go over whole line. So if it hit the back of the post it was a behind.

 

[Joao]

We really needed Reidy. To ask Jackson to ruck all day in the wet against such a big heavy opponent and then be his usual self around the ground was asking too much. We were killed at the bounce downs.

It doesn't work if Reidy can't actually compete though. You just end playing 1 short because he's out of his depth. He doesn't even get stats in the WAFL so to think he's coming in against a 200 game AFL ruckman and making a difference is beyond wishful thinking.

 

[mayne iac]

Fyfes running ability is a problem

 

[Fred Ziffel]

I watched the replay and saw the very slightest deflection, looked like it grazed the back of the post but the ball was over the line - is that a goal or even touching the post after going fully over the line is a behind?

If the ball grazes the back side of the post it is deemed a goal.
I had good view of it and the ball did not hit the post . The ball only just cleared the goal line so it’s trajectory was more downward at that point.
I don’t know why the umpire stayed over the other side of the goal square when the ball was clearly heading towards the other post.
Goal reviews are an utter waste of time and have become farcical. I would much rather have the umpire make a correct or otherwise decision and just accept it as part of the game and get on with it.

 

[Boppo]

It doesn't work if Reidy can't actually compete though. You just end playing 1 short because he's out of his depth. He doesn't even get stats in the WAFL so to think he's coming in against a 200 game AFL ruckman and making a difference is beyond wishful thinking.

Then what’s the point of him on our list? All he needs to do is try and counter the Nankervis role.

 

[gaskin]

I don’t know why the umpire stayed over the other side of the goal square when the ball was clearly heading towards the other post.

So he is not interfering with the defender trying to get a touch on it.

 

[Joao]

Then what’s the point of him on our list? All he needs to do is try and counter the Nankervis role.

He's a 22yo ruck. He's probably a year or 2 off being able to do that (if he is ever).

I'm sure he'd play if we lost both rucks at which point you just take what you can get. He's break glass.

 

[Beak_A]

Neither. I had good view.

From my possie I could clearly see it wasn’t touched but couldn’t tell about the post though it didn’t look like it grazed it . I think the goal ump did the right thing if he wasnt sure and the process was right. My question is why don’t they have the edge tech ? Getting Close decisions at critical times right is its whole value proposition so decisions don’t default to not enough evidence


My Buddy is NOD

 

[Megalon]

If the ball grazes the back side of the post it is deemed a goal.
I had good view of it and the ball did not hit the post . The ball only just cleared the goal line so it’s trajectory was more downward at that point.
I don’t know why the umpire stayed over the other side of the goal square when the ball was clearly heading towards the other post.
Goal reviews are an utter waste of time and have become farcical. I would much rather have the umpire make a correct or otherwise decision and just accept it as part of the game and get on with it.

I'll defer to you who was at the game as I was rewatching from the limited TV angle

When watching the replay I remembered they had introduced a Snicko like thing for AFL, and I saw it used earlier this year... why not last night? It's been shown in cricket to show if there is an edge, and also if it's bat or pad (or footwork) quite effectively. Think it was a great thing to bring into cricket rather than relying on the hearing of an umpire standing on the opposite end of the pitch to make a decision

AFL 2019: New goal line technology, similar to cricket’s Snicko, to help goal review system

Snicko for footy: AFL brings in new tech to help goal reviews

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[Freomaniac]

It wasn’t a selection error because. Brodie is injured

I was alone in my view to give Reidy a debut game.

A 22 year old mature aged ruckman. Not sure if it would of made a difference in the weekend.

But I can live with him playing this week. Both Reidy and Jackson share the ruck spot.

 

[Megalon]

From my possie I could clearly see it wasn’t touched but couldn’t tell about the post though it didn’t look like it grazed it . I think the goal ump did the right thing if he wasnt sure and the process was right. My question is why don’t they have the edge tech ? Getting Close decisions at critical times right is its whole value proposition so decisions don’t default to not enough evidence


My Buddy is NOD

Totally agree, was writing my reply while you posted. What is the AFL's policy, is it actually supposed to be used at every game?

 

[Freomaniac]

But more importantly Freomaniac how much did you WIN!?

Well I was stupid. I was gonna throw $20 on the tigers at $2.60. would of got $52 back.

I put $10 on tigers at $2.30 1 hour before the bounce

 

[Fred Ziffel]

So he is not interfering with the defender trying to get a touch on it.

And by doing so is not in the best position to make those close determinations.
The umpire had an extremely obstructed view in this case.
My point is the goal review system is a total waste of time. We got screwed on this one but I’m sure we have pinched a few good calls in the past.
I think there’s a practical solution to this problem ;
a. If the ball hits the goal post but ricochets back into play it is play on.
b. If the ball clears the goal line but hits the goal post then the following applies b.1 if the ball hits the post but passes between the goal posts it is deemed a goal. b.2 if the ball hits the goal post but passes on the behind side of the post it is deemed a point.

 

[E Shed]

NOD was so much worse than henry it’s not even funny, don’t think he had one clean possession

He did hit up Sturt in Space when Sturt kicked that lovely goal.

 

[Alfonz]

He did hit up Sturt in Space when Sturt kicked that lovely goal.

That was Serong who made that kick. Which went off the side of the boot (can't tell on TV but I sit on that wing). NOD gave it to Serong.

 

[Beak_A]

Totally agree, was writing my reply while you posted. What is the AFL's policy, is it actually supposed to be used at every game?

Totally agree, was writing my reply while you posted. What is the AFL's policy, is it actually supposed to be used at every game?

Hmmm found this early bit of media about the introduction and use of AFL Edge

My Buddy is NOD

 

[muckypup]

I watched the replay and saw the very slightest deflection, looked like it grazed the back of the post but the ball was over the line - is that a goal or even touching the post after going fully over the line is a behind?

its a point i believe. post is the line in that case.

 

[FreoRicci]

Walker was doing alright down back. He would’ve been a suitable tag for Bolton.

 

[SPEEDWAGON]

I still can’t get my head around why teams who come off a Bye can’t play each other, and why it’s split three weeks?

We play dogs and Essendon both off byes

 

[apuchar]

I'm afraid, for the first time in my life, I switched it off after the 2nd uncontested mark right in front of goal by Riewoldt against Pearce. The whole thing was just so predictable. And no, I don't care about the fightback. Work started at 5.30.
Can someone tell me who was on Matt Short and whether we were playing a defensive forward on Valustin.

 

[FreoRicci]

I'm afraid, for the first time in my life, I switched it off after the 2nd uncontested mark right in front of goal by Riewoldt against Pearce. The whole thing was just so predictable. And no, I don't care about the fightback. Work started at 5.30.
Can someone tell me who was on Matt Short and whether we were playing a defensive forward on Valustin.

Banfield would’ve been better to be manning Vlastuin everywhere he went.

 

[Purple Jesus]

I'm afraid, for the first time in my life, I switched it off after the 2nd uncontested mark right in front of goal by Riewoldt against Pearce. The whole thing was just so predictable. And no, I don't care about the fightback. Work started at 5.30.
Can someone tell me who was on Matt Short and whether we were playing a defensive forward on Valustin.

That was deplorable by Pearce.

 

[Sumwun]

If the ball grazes the back side of the post it is deemed a goal.
I had good view of it and the ball did not hit the post . The ball only just cleared the goal line so it’s trajectory was more downward at that point.
I don’t know why the umpire stayed over the other side of the goal square when the ball was clearly heading towards the other post.
Goal reviews are an utter waste of time and have become farcical. I would much rather have the umpire make a correct or otherwise decision and just accept it as part of the game and get on with it.

As someone else has posted, the posts are considered part of the goal line. All of the ball has to pass over the goal line. Therefore, if the ball touches any part of the post (padding is also part of the post) it is a behind.

16.1.2 Scoring a Behind
Subject to Law 16.2, a Behind is scored when any of the following occurs:
(b) the football touches or passes over the goal post or touches the padding or any
other attachment to the goal post;

 

[wakojako]

That was deplorable by Pearce.

He got smoked by a 34 year old and potentially lost us the game amongst other things. Idk if it's entirely his fault though as our midfield was getting overrun and they were getting good supply to the forwardline. The bye would have also taken away some momentum.