Ziebell's shot judged to have hit the post

[SJ]

Can someone please tell me where the "conclusive evidence" is that the ball hit the post? For the life of me I cannot see even a hint of it.

http://www.afl.com.au/video?guid=657220

 

[Thewlis Dish]

What's worse is it took five full minutes to get to a seemingly incorrect decision.

Players made contact with the post, which is what caused it to move.

 

[DonsRule]

Should not have been overturned.

I think it was a goal, but even if it wasn't not enough to overturn, umpires call.

Cab't see how it was overturned.

 

[jacko57]

You'd hate to see a Grand Final decided by a call like that!

 

[D-N-R]

It´s ridiculous. If the ball had hit the post hard enough at that height to cause it to shake, it would have come of at right angles.

 

[melbournemartin]

Correct decision. Good use of the video referral system.

 

[Topkent]

Correct decision. Good use of the video referral system.

lol

 

[Bleeeeeeeeep]

Scrap it and start again, don't introduce something half assed. Get it right then bring it in.

 

[kosifantutti]

Gee if they wanted a decision to overturn, how about the Hibberd one that clearly hit the post? Or last week when Luke Delaney with his 3 metre arm jumped from a metre inside the line, reached diagonally backwards and touched a ball that was allegedly over the line before landing again a metre inside the line.

 

[Furn2]

Where was hot spot?

 

[Armadeo]

I dont even... where... how... I missed the audio bit.... but... I.... F^&* it.

 

[Purple Suit]

They need hawkeye for the goals. Just make the graphic come up like it does in the tennis, cricket or the soccer world cup. People always belief data from a computer so that will solve the problem.

Either that or go back to the old days when we just called them all goals and no knew better or cared as much.

 

[bkozican]

Shocked is the only thing that comes to mind........Just shows where the AFL is at

 

[SuperSub17]

The defence of Mark Evans today was just completely pathetic. Saying they only overturned 1 incorrect decision out of 9 doesn't account for the countless rubbish "umpire's call" decisions like in the Melbourne-Gold Coast or Sydney-Geelong games

 

[melbournemartin]

They need hawkeye for the goals. Just make the graphic come up like it does in the tennis, cricket or the soccer world cup. People always belief data from a computer so that will solve the problem.

Either that or go back to the old days when we just called them all goals and no knew better or cared as much.

Not that simple for several reasons:

1) the sports you mentioned have round balls. The hawk-eye system would need significant adaptation to work for an oval ball
2) in tennis and soccer you are simply checking if a ball crosses a line. In cricket it's a little more complicated. In AFL you are checking for the ball crossing the line, the ball hitting the post and whether a tiny fingernail from a player touches it. It's much more complicated.

The #1 thing they need to do is stop telling the video referee what the umpire's call is. It adds bias.

 

[SloaneysDanger]

I laughed more at the fact Mark Evans said it was the right decision not to review the Bombers goal which actually hit the post.

"there wasn't enough evidence to suggest the ball hit the post." Well, if you actually looked at a few replays, you would have seen the ball hit the post on one of the camera angles that was shown.

Idiot.

 

[D-N-R]

I laughed more at the fact Mark Evans said it was the right decision not to review the Bombers goal which actually hit the post.

"there wasn't enough evidence to suggest the ball hit the post." Well, if you actually looked at a few replays, you would have seen the ball hit the post on one of the camera angles that was shown.

Idiot.

He said that there can be distortion from some angles - which is true - but you can clearly see the ball's spin change after it passes the post.

 

[tazaa]

Its a disgrace how someone like Mark Evans can go from respected Hawthorn man to AFL puppet in weeks.
Get rid of the system. It is making umpires second guess themselves. Call it as you see it because the *******s upstairs have no clue either.

 

[NSWCROW]

I laughed more at the fact Mark Evans said it was the right decision not to review the Bombers goal which actually hit the post.

"there wasn't enough evidence to suggest the ball hit the post." Well, if you actually looked at a few replays, you would have seen the ball hit the post on one of the camera angles that was shown.

Idiot.

Were you surprised ??.....

 

[SloaneysDanger]

Were you surprised ??.....

Hello no, the game is run by idiots all year round. These decisions are never surprising to me.

 

[Pottering]

This was one of the best things to happen because it showed beyond all doubt what a pathetic thing this whole goal referral thing is. It's a shambles and hasbeen from the start. I was hoping now that we no longer had to hear Andrew Demetriou telling us how well it was working someone with some balls at the AFL would admit that it was rushed in in haste and has been trying to justify itself ever since. It makes the goal umps in their old lab coats look professional.