Autopsy AFL 2022 Second Elimination Final - Lions v Tigers Thurs Sept 1st 7:20pm EST (Gabba)

[Sully111]

Wasn't Lybch's shot on goal a direct result of the incorrect ran to far call against Rich?

Decisions made by umpires on the fly are often wrong.

This is different.

This is a guy with time and vision. It's a score review put in place for the purpose of getting it right. But there are simple rules around it. The rule is simple. If it's not absolutely definitive, it goes back to the umpire's call. That's it. He didn't follow that simple rule.

Tigers got shafted. Season over. Not good enough.

Honestly, if my team had beaten them that way I'd be happy for the win, but my position on the rule would be exactly the same.

There's no grey area here.

 

[docko911]

Thought Brisbane got robbed two pretty blatant deliberate behinds tbh.

You obviously don’t know the rules then.

 

[dirknowitzki]

I love how people focus on goal reviews specifically. The inside delivers for tiges were woeful. Did dusty get a single assist all game?

 

[MisterMarcus]

It seems to have been lost a bit among all the whining and sooking and trolling on here, but:

Brisbane were exceptional tonight. Came in under a massive cloud after Round 23, with key players missing AND their ruckman go down in the first few minutes. I reckon most people would have thought they'd roll over and decide it's all a bit too hard, but Brisbane fought extremely well all night.

It's a pity the goal review controversy will dominate some people's thinking, because the Lions absolutely deserve this win.

 

[dirknowitzki]

It seems to have been lost a bit among all the whining and sooking and trolling on here, but:

Brisbane were exceptional tonight. Came in under a massive cloud after Round 23, with key players missing AND their ruckman go down in the first few minutes. I reckon most people would have thought they'd roll over and decide it's all a bit too hard, but Brisbane fought extremely well all night.

It's a pity the goal review controversy will dominate some people's thinking, because the Lions absolutely deserve this win.

the hit outs kept the tiges in it but their weak mid field let neale monster the clearances. pretty entertaining match !

 

[aCunningPlan]

It seems to have been lost a bit among all the whining and sooking and trolling on here, but:

Brisbane were exceptional tonight. Came in under a massive cloud after Round 23, with key players missing AND their ruckman go down in the first few minutes. I reckon most people would have thought they'd roll over and decide it's all a bit too hard, but Brisbane fought extremely well all night.

It's a pity the goal review controversy will dominate some people's thinking, because the Lions absolutely deserve this win.

They finally stood up in finals pressure and got the job done, their list will take a lot away from last night and be all the better for it.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Credit to Hardwick, he was pretty measured in his presser. I assume he'd lose his rag but he handled it well.

As an aside, he looked like he’d been sleeping in a park for 4 days. Wash your goddamn face Dimma.

 

[docko911]

Decisions made by umpires on the fly are often wrong.

This is different.

This is a guy with time and vision. It's a score review put in place for the purpose of getting it right. But there are simple rules around it. The rule is simple. If it's not absolutely definitive, it goes back to the umpire's call. That's it. He didn't follow that simple rule.

Tigers got shafted. Season over. Not good enough.

Honestly, if my team had beaten them that way I'd be happy for the win, but my position on the rule would be exactly the same.

There's no grey area here.

Not only was there not conclusive evidence to support overturning the goal, it most probably was a goal based on still images. Take a look at these images taken from a screenshot of the ARC.

This is the front on view showing the ball inside the post. It’s irrefutable it is inside the post.



This is a second image from the left side at the exact same point in time. This image is important because it shows the ball over the post. We know the ball is not over the post based on the front on view. As a result the ball must be on or behind the goal line at this point in time. It would otherwise be impossible for the ball to appear over the post from this angle.



The ARC should be a trained professional who understands angles but they have clearly made a significant rushed error. This decision must be overturned for the integrity of the game.

 

[Fadge]

Not only was there not conclusive evidence to support overturning the goal, it most probably was a goal based on still images. Take a look at these images taken from a screenshot of the ARC.

This is the front on view showing the ball inside the post. It’s irrefutable it is inside the post.

View attachment 1496840

This is a second image from the left side at the exact same point in time. This image is important because it shows the ball over the post. We know the ball is not over the post based on the front on view. As a result the ball must be on or behind the goal line at this point in time. It would otherwise be impossible for the ball to appear over the post from this angle.

View attachment 1496842

The ARC should be a trained professional who understands angles but they have clearly made a significant rushed error. This decision must be overturned for the integrity of the game.

You're coming across as desperate.

The game's been decided, time to move on.

 

[beerbandit]

A lot of Geelong supporters kicking the boots into Richmond. This might get more entertaining as the final series unravels.

 

[Fadge]

In the 90 seconds immediately preceding the Goal Review, the following umpiring decisions were made in Richmond's favour:

1. Free kick against Daniher when McCarthy took the mark 20 metres out from goal. This was a 20/80 decision.
2. Non-call for Bolton incorrect disposal. This was an 80/20 decision.
3. Free kick against Rich for running too far. This was a 30/70 decision.

Tigers fans shouldn't be crying about umpiring robbing them of the game.

 

[campbell]

You're coming across as desperate.

The game's been decided, time to move on.

The goal was at the Richmond cheer squad end,no celebration before review.Not a celebration from Lynch.

It was a point guys.

Let it rest.......

 

[loopy08]

Looks like Brisbane plays Dees next week, at least according to Fox panel. Already decided Melbourne lose tomorrow.

Dunstall was playing Devils Advocate and posing a what if question to his fellow panellists regarding whether or not Brisbane would play a ruckman next week. As he explained when Sarah Jones queried him on it, Sydney's main ruckman, similar to Richmond's, doesn't hurt you around the ground with his ability to link up play like Gawn and Jackson do.

Nankervis and Hickey are both good ruckman but wouldn't cause Brisbane's midfield problems like Max Gawn will should they play each other. Dunstall used Melbourne in his analogy because Sydney's ruckman is similar in style to Richmond's and Brisbane would have an advantage in around the ground mobility should they play Sydney so the question was only relevant if Brisbane play Melbourne.

 

[Hollow Knight]

The biggest cause of controversy is that the review system requires the goal umpire to still make a soft call, even when they have no idea. He clearly had no clue in this situation.



If he was allowed to say “sorry, I genuinely have no idea, can the ARC decide?” people would be way more zen about this.

Instead we have people bemoaning the process despite the fact that the outcome was almost certainly right. In essence, Tigers fans are howling that they didn’t get a freebie.

No player thought it was a goal, the umpire had no idea and was forced to guess…

I’ll take a correct outcome from a flawed process over the alternative. But at least this wat the media still get their clickbait and Tigers fans get to curl up in the foetal position and say ”we was robbed!”

How good is Lachie Neale

9

Lachie Neale

Age

30

Ht

178cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

27.0

5star

K

11.5

4star

HB

15.5

5star

M

4.0

4star

T

3.7

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

28.3

5star

K

13.9

5star

HB

14.4

5star

M

4.6

4star

T

4.0

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

12.0

3star

K

4.6

2star

HB

7.4

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

1.0

3star

CL

0.4

3star

!!!

 

[docko911]

You're coming across as desperate.

The game's been decided, time to move on.

No, that’s absolute bullshit. It’s either a significant error that must be addressed or corruption. It’s not a HTB decision made in a split second, it is a video umpire with time, technology and multiple camera angles who has rushed to overturn an umpires decision. It must be conclusive, my photos prove it is not. It took me all of a minute to take that screenshot so why is the trained professional getting it so wrong. Action either needs to be taken or the game is an absolute farce and the AFL, who already ticked it off, are going to continue being allowed to manipulate results. It’s no coincidence Richmond got screwed because Dusty is in trouble in the media. AFL want us out of the spotlight to save their ass!

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Decisions made by umpires on the fly are often wrong.

This is different.

This is a guy with time and vision. It's a score review put in place for the purpose of getting it right. But there are simple rules around it. The rule is simple. If it's not absolutely definitive, it goes back to the umpire's call. That's it. He didn't follow that simple rule.

Tigers got shafted. Season over. Not good enough.

Honestly, if my team had beaten them that way I'd be happy for the win, but my position on the rule would be exactly the same.

There's no grey area here.

Two things can be true at once. The score review got it wrong and the right outcome happened. The process

In the 90 seconds immediately preceding the Goal Review, the following umpiring decisions were made in Richmond's favour:

1. Free kick against Daniher when McCarthy took the mark 20 metres out from goal. This was a 20/80 decision.
2. Non-call for Bolton incorrect disposal. This was an 80/20 decision.
3. Free kick against Rich for running too far. This was a 30/70 decision.

Tigers fans shouldn't be crying about umpiring robbing them of the game

The Daniher free was iffy. In one replay it looked like he got a finger to the ball, but they never replayed it closely to be sure.

There was another unrealistic call against Daniher earlier when the Richmond defender blacked his run and almost tunneled him. Commentators called it “clever defending”. Nope it was illegal and almost dangerous

 

[docko911]

It seems to have been lost a bit among all the whining and sooking and trolling on here, but:

Brisbane were exceptional tonight. Came in under a massive cloud after Round 23, with key players missing AND their ruckman go down in the first few minutes. I reckon most people would have thought they'd roll over and decide it's all a bit too hard, but Brisbane fought extremely well all night.

It's a pity the goal review controversy will dominate some people's thinking, because the Lions absolutely deserve this win.

Well technically they don’t because they lost but the ARC cheated to prevent Richmond from scoring the winning goal.

 

[Fadge]

No, that’s absolute bullshit. It’s either a significant error that must be addressed or corruption. It’s not a HTB decision made in a split second, it is a video umpire with time, technology and multiple camera angles who has rushed to overturn an umpires decision. It must be conclusive, my photos prove it is not. It took me all of a minute to take that screenshot so why is the trained professional getting it so wrong. Action either needs to be taken or the game is an absolute farce and the AFL, who already ticked it off, are going to continue being allowed to manipulate results. It’s no coincidence Richmond got screwed because Dusty is in trouble in the media. AFL want us out of the spotlight to save their ass!

How was the screenshot you shared conclusive? It could very well be taken immediately before the ball crosses over the top of the goal post.

 

[Kangapirate]

Are we heading for even bigger goal posts next year? lol

 

[dangerwood]

Not only was there not conclusive evidence to support overturning the goal, it most probably was a goal based on still images. Take a look at these images taken from a screenshot of the ARC.

This is the front on view showing the ball inside the post. It’s irrefutable it is inside the post.

View attachment 1496840

This is a second image from the left side at the exact same point in time. This image is important because it shows the ball over the post. We know the ball is not over the post based on the front on view. As a result the ball must be on or behind the goal line at this point in time. It would otherwise be impossible for the ball to appear over the post from this angle.

View attachment 1496842

The ARC should be a trained professional who understands angles but they have clearly made a significant rushed error. This decision must be overturned for the integrity of the game.

ARC must be run by Geelong supporters. Steve Hocking probably appointed them.

 

[kickazz]

Decisions made by umpires on the fly are often wrong.

This is different.

This is a guy with time and vision. It's a score review put in place for the purpose of getting it right. But there are simple rules around it. The rule is simple. If it's not absolutely definitive, it goes back to the umpire's call. That's it. He didn't follow that simple rule.

Tigers got shafted. Season over. Not good enough.

Honestly, if my team had beaten them that way I'd be happy for the win, but my position on the rule would be exactly the same.

There's no grey area here.

Yeah, and I understand this is not how it works, but pragmatically I am happy for "beyond reasonable doubt" (the current use of ARC) to be replaced by "balance of probabilities" in cases where the umpire had low confidence in his initial decision.

That's what happened here. Goal umpire had that look on his face, I don't think he had much clue, would have been hard from that position. So his forced decision is a low confidence one. Whilst not 99% sure, the video replay, I'd suggest you'd definitely say with greater than 50% confidence it was a behind.

 

[loopy08]

Holy moly Tiger fans.

It's not the score review's fault.

Umps were bending us over in the first half but we got our share back at the end of the game for sure.

Lynch should have kicked the goal, period. Baker and M Rioli should have been cleaner and not turned it over. Backline should have killed that last ball which Daniher kicked.

It's representative of our whole year - wasted opportunities.

Lions won in the clutch and deserved to.

True, umpiring was poor all night.

Biggest difference for me was Brisbane's senior players playing team first football and making the most of their opportunities. Joe Danniher was probably beaten most of the night but walks away having kicked the same number of goals as Riewoldt and Lynch because he made the most of his opportunities. Zac Bailey and Charlie Cameron did numerous little one percenters to keep the ball alive or tap it on to a teammate in a better position. On the Richmond side you have Dusty Martin who came in underdone and had little impact and Shai Bolton who, although talented and a terrific player every club would love to have, can be a little selfish at times and is prone to mid game fadeouts.

Also Lauchie Neale and his coolness under pressure. Finished with 13 more disposals than the next highest person. Richmond's highest disposal getter (Nankervis) had a thought process of "I'm bigger than my opponent, I'll just catch it out the ruck and kick blindly with no thought process as to keeping possession or giving it to a better ball user".

 

[kickazz]

No, that’s absolute bullshit. It’s either a significant error that must be addressed or corruption. It’s not a HTB decision made in a split second, it is a video umpire with time, technology and multiple camera angles who has rushed to overturn an umpires decision. It must be conclusive, my photos prove it is not. It took me all of a minute to take that screenshot so why is the trained professional getting it so wrong. Action either needs to be taken or the game is an absolute farce and the AFL, who already ticked it off, are going to continue being allowed to manipulate results. It’s no coincidence Richmond got screwed because Dusty is in trouble in the media. AFL want us out of the spotlight to save their ass!

Okaaaaaaaay

True, umpiring was poor all night.

Biggest difference for me was Brisbane's senior players playing team first football and making the most of their opportunities. Joe Danniher was probably beaten most of the night but walks away having kicked the same number of goals as Riewoldt and Lynch because he made the most of his opportunities. Zac Bailey and Charlie Cameron did numerous little one percenters to keep the ball alive or tap it on to a teammate in a better position. On the Richmond side you have Dusty Martin who came in underdone and had little impact and Shai Bolton who, although talented and a terrific player every club would love to have, can be a little selfish at times and is prone to mid game fadeouts.

Also Lauchie Neale and his coolness under pressure. Finished with 13 more disposals than the next highest person. Richmond's highest disposal getter (Nankervis) had a thought process of "I'm bigger than my opponent, I'll just catch it out the ruck and kick blindly with no thought process as to keeping possession or giving it to a better ball user".

How dare you talk about the actual game. Game day threads are for umpire whinging.

 

[docko911]

How was the screenshot you shared conclusive? It could very well be taken immediately before the ball crosses over the top of the goal post.

It doesn’t have to be conclusive, their evidence has to be conclusive and mine proves it wasn’t. The still they had on tv was clearly when the ball was behind the line.

Look at this photo. The front on view has the ball over the post on the left side but from the left angle it is over the post on the right side. The cause of this is the ball position which has to be behind the post for it to move to left. It’s pretty damn conclusive, that you couldn’t conclusively say it was a behind.

 

[boncer34]

Not only was there not conclusive evidence to support overturning the goal, it most probably was a goal based on still images. Take a look at these images taken from a screenshot of the ARC.

This is the front on view showing the ball inside the post. It’s irrefutable it is inside the post.

View attachment 1496840

This is a second image from the left side at the exact same point in time. This image is important because it shows the ball over the post. We know the ball is not over the post based on the front on view. As a result the ball must be on or behind the goal line at this point in time. It would otherwise be impossible for the ball to appear over the post from this angle.

View attachment 1496842

The ARC should be a trained professional who understands angles but they have clearly made a significant rushed error. This decision must be overturned for the integrity of the game.

You've screenshot that first one earlier than the second.