Autopsy AFL 2025 Rd 20 - Crows v Port - Sat July 26th 7:40PM ACST/ 8:10pm AEST (Adelaide Oval)

[voorhees]

Why the **** would you go to the footy in that lmao.

been raining for the last 2 days here.

 

[ozaddy]

Adelaide the better side, but geez, a couple ordinary umpiring decisions have turned very costly. At this rate 40 free kicks to Adelaide. Umps need to have a hard look at themselves at half time, as ordinary as Parnell is dishonest at the moment

 

[windyhill]

Why the **** would you go to the footy in that lmao.

For the love of it.

 

[loopy0812]

You can’t take that long and then still go to umpires call.

It's the only correct decision if taking that long. The rule is must be conclusive evidence to overturn. If you need that many replays it's obviously not conclusive or the person doing the review is gutless. Simple solution, have a set number of replays that can be shown eg 8, if you can't make a decision after that it's either inconclusive or the person doing the review is incompetent.

 

[SC_Power]

Why do you think the count should be even ?

Adelaide had more because they earned them, if Thilthorpe got frees for all holding port are doing we would have a lot more

I was judging the game, not just the free kicks.

There wasn’t much to suggest that one team was playing perfectly to the rule book and one was constantly contravening the rules.
Also said at the same time that Adelaide were dominating and didn’t need the advantage.

In the end, does it matter, no. Youre off to finals and we’re off to holidays.

 

[ozaddy]

It's the only correct decision if taking that long. The rule is must be conclusive evidence to overturn. If you need that many replays it's obviously not conclusive or the person doing the review is gutless. Simple solution, have a set number of replays that can be shown eg 8, if you can't make a decision after that it's either inconclusive or the person doing the review is incompetent.

Then don't let a player be in the goal umpires face, how do we know what the soft decision was before Keane went in and told him how to think

 

[hippyhippy]

It's the only correct decision if taking that long. The rule is must be conclusive evidence to overturn. If you need that many replays it's obviously not conclusive or the person doing the review is gutless. Simple solution, have a set number of replays that can be shown eg 8, if you can't make a decision after that it's either inconclusive or the person doing the review is incompetent.

Can't blame the umpire for the call though... it was clearly touched but there's no way he could tell it might have touched back and forth

 

[OverseasCrowNA]

Why the **** would you go to the footy in that lmao.

Because it's awesome, wet weather footy is fun as long as it isn't windy.

 

[ozaddy]

I was judging the game, not just the free kicks.

There wasn’t much to suggest that one team was playing perfectly to the rule book and one was constantly contravening the rules.
Also said at the same time that Adelaide were dominating and didn’t need the advantage.

In the end, does it matter, no. Youre off to finals and we’re off to holidays.

How about when the ump blew the whistle on anticipation the Crows player was going mark it, that's incompetence.

 

[loopy0812]

Then don't let a player be in the goal umpires face, how do we know what the soft decision was before Keane went in and told him how to think

My post wasn't in response to whether it was a goal or not, it was in response to a poster that made a comment about the number of replays for the decision to not be overturned. My point was nothing to do with whether it was a goal or not but rather a comment on the process that is used. For the record, I felt there was sufficient evidence to overturn and would have done so if I was in that position. That being said, if the person doing the review needed that many reviews then umpire's call was the only appropriate decision as they obviously didn't feel it was conclusive.

 

[windyhill]

" hits the kill switch for a second"
**** off derwayne.

 

[OverseasCrowNA]

Another showdown, another case of Port risking players with head knocks.

 

[matty lloyd the champ]

Another showdown, another case of Port risking players with head knocks.

Always looks suspect when teams chose not to test their stars with head knocks.

 

[hippyhippy]

In the space of 2 mins the umpires even up crappy calls

 

[CrowToon]

No HTB, no 15 on a 20m kick and no insufficient intent on a hack soccer kick out.

 

[RCAB]

Worst 2 minutes of umpiring I've seen in my life.

 

[RCAB]

No HTB, no 15 on a 20m kick and no insufficient intent on a hack soccer kick out.

You also got an advantage but you didn't notice that

 

[voorhees]

Thilthorpe in the right positions
good in the wet goal

 

[SC_Power]

No HTB, no 15 on a 20m kick and no insufficient intent on a hack soccer kick out.

So hard done by, the Crows fans…. ah, the hilarity of it all.

Dominating a showdown, top of the ladder, doubling a free kick count…. And still finding a way to complain the hard done by.

 

[loopy0812]

Can't blame the umpire for the call though... it was clearly touched by there's no way he could tell it might have voices back and forth

Yeah. There will be worse decisions made on a score review this year. That wouldn't even make the top 100.

 

[voorhees]

Dawson nice snap

 

[PerthBoy86]

Id say the dam wall has broken, but it appears water has already flooded the oval.

 

[PerthBoy86]

2 cleat htbs...but it doesn't matter, Port look so lacklustre. Without JHF, Butters, Rozee (barely), Aliir, they're Eagles level bad.

 

[hawkman]

That may be one of the worst calls of the year as the umpire completely guessed

 

[CrowToon]

You also got an advantage but you didn't notice that

The post? Selective memory. Im as guilty as anyone there.