Snicko/edge goal review

[tiger_tough]

Dustys goal got reviewed and given umpires call because the crowd was too noisy and the ball supposedly hit too high up on the post

Imagine a game deciding goal in a granny not being able to be properly reviewed because of crowd noise. The ball didn't even 'hit' the post high up. 3/4ers at most.

Either they have the tech or not. If it's not reliable, * it off completely.

 

[tiger_tough]

Just saw a reply on the footy show. It was literally 1/3 of the way up the post. Not far above the padding.

 

[Lsta062]

Aren’t the crowds always loud when the ball goes through the goalposts though? If the technology isn’t suited to when the crowd is loud, then there is no point of wasting money on it.

As you said, it really wasn’t that high on the post either. I was very confused when they didn’t show us results from the edge technology and this ‘official’ response doesn’t really clarify it to the level that we want

 

[thedank]

Backwater league. Same with the officiating, guernsey clash and scheduling issues

 

[tigerwill]

Just do away with touched or hit the post.

If the kick goes through the goals, award a goal whether it’s been touched or glances the post.
Sam for any behinds.

Bloody easy, no adjudication needed, no stop play and it would be fair to all teams. No one is disadvantaged.

 

[Purple Suit]

Dustys goal got reviewed and given umpires call because the crowd was too noisy and the ball supposedly hit too high up on the post

Imagine a game deciding goal in a granny not being able to be properly reviewed because of crowd noise. The ball didn't even 'hit' the post high up. 3/4ers at most.

Either they have the tech or not. If it's not reliable, duck it off completely. View attachment 1406220

It’s not a big deal in a grand final. We’ve had errors in 2009 but no one made a massive deal about it because the rest of the game played out. After the siren review would be interesting.

The tech is not 100% but I think the Dusty review was correct & go with the umpires call in the end as it wasn’t conclusive.

 

[Purple Suit]

Just do away with touched or hit the post.

If the kick goes through the goals, award a goal whether it’s been touched or glances the post.
Sam for any behinds.

Bloody easy, no adjudication needed, no stop play and it would be fair to all teams. No one is disadvantaged.

What happens if it bounces back off the goal post onto the oval? Point or play on? Same for the point post?

 

[tiger_tough]

It’s not a big deal in a grand final. We’ve had errors in 2009 but no one made a massive deal about it because the rest of the game played out. After the siren review would be interesting.

The tech is not 100% but I think the Dusty review was correct & go with the umpires call in the end as it wasn’t conclusive.

Wouldn't it have been conclusive if the 'Edge' technology did or did not show a result? To use crowd noise and the ball hitting high on the post when it was barely above the padding as reasons why it couldn't be used is garbage. Bush league.

 

[Purple Suit]

Wouldn't it have been conclusive if the 'Edge' technology did or did not show a result? To use crowd noise and the ball hitting high on the post when it was barely above the padding as reasons why it couldn't be used is garbage. Bush league.

If the tech is not viable in 50% of use cases, it's still not a reason to throw it all away. It's more accurate, so use it when you can otherwise revert to umpires call.

I recon the goal umpires get a lot more right than wrong unless they get obstructed or knocked over so have no idea what happened. It's become the case of use the tech because I don't want to get it wrong similar to cricket run outs, when the vast majority of their calls are spot on.

 

[tiger_tough]

If the tech is not viable in 50% of use cases, it's still not a reason to throw it all away. It's more accurate, so use it when you can otherwise revert to umpires call.

I recon the goal umpires get a lot more right than wrong unless they get obstructed or knocked over so have no idea what happened. It's become the case of use the tech because I don't want to get it wrong similar to cricket run outs, when the vast majority of their calls are spot on.

If it can't be used for the reasons stated by the AFL this week then it's either not good enough or they were lying.

Agree that umps get it right most times however they've become so scared to make a call they're second guessing even the most simple of calls. The whole review system is a farce.

 

[Andyy]

This is what slow motion in F1 looks like.

Meanwhile in AFL it's like going back to the stone age.