Autopsy 1 point Heart stopper against Adelaide.

[Citrus22]

Could we also ask to have the high fend off of Dawson on Fox that led to a goal immediately after reviewed as well? I'm sure there's a few other calls we could ask for in the final quarter while we're at it too.

 

[BloodySwan]

Dunno why any Swans fan is arguing footage was inconclusive. Just take the win and run

 

[kelpie_X]

Hearing McAdam has a broken jaw…

Doesn't matter. He's not playing finals.

 

[momentbymoment]

It’s because the impact was not serious…Drs would have reviewed over and again on the bench and still chose to do nothing, because impact was low.

Impact to the head was low, but the chance of the Swans moving deep into the finals is high.

Hence the 2 week ban.

 

[Citrus22]

Really don't understand the goal umpire being stood down either, what an absolute scapegoat.

Can someone remind me how long the field umpires in the 2016 Grand Final were stood down for after the league admitted the performance was sub par?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Dunno why any Swans fan is arguing footage was inconclusive. Just take the win and run

Because none of the footage is conclusive.

 

[BloodySwan]

Really don't understand the goal umpire being stood down either, what an absolute scapegoat.

Can someone remind me how long the field umpires in the 2016 Grand Final were stood down for after the league admitted the performance was sub par?

Goal and boundary umpires are normally from the local area. So The goal umpire has been stood down for 2 potential games. Not a huge blow in the end

 

[kelpie_X]

This suspension is a joke. It shouldn’t have even been a free.

McCartin correctly followed the bounce of the ball while keeping his body low - perfect technique.

The Adelaide player kept running straight and hit McCartin, head first, seeking to drew the free.

By the time the Adelaide player hit McCartin, McCartin already had his back turned to him and was facing the ball. I took screen shots and here is the link if you correctly don’t automatically trust a freeze frame - Link

At the very worst, it is a football incident. If the Adelaide player wasn’t planning on staging and actually hit McCartin with some force, it should have been a free to McCartin for a hit in the back. It’s not McCartin fault that he is not soft as * like the Adelaide player.

We should appeal. The AFL is a farce.

Nah the suspension is right I reckon

 

[BloodySwan]

Because none of the footage is conclusive.

The one behind the goal is very conclusive

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Really don't understand the goal umpire being stood down either, what an absolute scapegoat.

Yes, unbelievable. Just how unprofessional does the AFL want to look?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

The one behind the goal is very conclusive

Can you post it please? I’ve seen heaps of footage that shows it looks like it was a goal, but I haven’t seen anything that shows the goal umpire (who was in a near-perfect position, let’s not forget) was wrong. That is the issue here.

If it looks like a goal but the goal umpire says it was a behind, then unless definitive footage can be produced, we have to accept the umpire’s call.

 

[Millky95]

 

[MK38]

I don't understand why the umpire was stood down, there have been plenty of calls or non calls by field umpires in the last few minutes even seconds of games that have been obviously wrong and cost teams. Don't recall any of them being stood down. Also perhaps the last quarter should be reviewed then, a number of calls in Adelaide's favour weren't there. Gave them momentum. Perhaps a couple of field umpires should be stood down then. Gee what about the play on outside the boundary in the Geelong game, I might be wrong but was anyone stood down for that? If they are going to stand down umpires then a lot should be stood down.

 

[kelpie_X]

That shows basically nothing.

Edited for "Crows" accuracy.

 

[kelpie_X]

?? Never said I was.

So no definitive footage. Thanks for dropping in.

PeterSalt definitely lives up to his name.

 

[MK38]

Because none of the footage is conclusive.

I agree, I haven't seen anything conclusive enough to overturn the decision

 

[Citrus22]

Yes, unbelievable. Just how unprofessional does the AFL want to look?

Makes them look amateur hour I agree, very reactive trying to placate the fans with a tokenistic response.

 

[MR0808]

Makes them look amateur hour I agree, very reactive trying to placate the fans with a tokenistic response.

To be honest, I'm so surprised Gil admitted that it would have been a goal. I was sure they'd come out and say the review would have been inconclusive and the behind would have stayed. That would have protected them from everything

 

[kelpie_X]

To be honest, I'm so surprised Gil admitted that it would have been a goal. I was sure they'd come out and say the review would have been inconclusive and the behind would have stayed. That would have protected them from everything

Just another dig at the Swans by the AFL obviously.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I don't understand why the umpire was stood down,

I don't understand why we were handed a 2 year trading ban for no reason.

Starting to believe the AFL, despite their multi-billion dollar broadcast deals, really is nothing more than an overblown boy's club.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

To be honest, I'm so surprised Gil admitted that it would have been a goal. I was sure they'd come out and say the review would have been inconclusive and the behind would have stayed. That would have protected them from everything

And it would have been the truth of the situation in the absence of more conclusive footage.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Yes it is an alternative view, but it's fan footage so therefore wouldn't be used for a score review.
I don't believe it would have been overturned - no matter what Gil said, it would have been umpires call.

Yep let's not forget the frame rate of phone footage gives completely inadequate res for such a situation.

 

[ashep]

IMO the available footage is 100% conclusive. It was a goal.

 

[melbournehammer]

IMO the available footage is 100% conclusive. It was a goal.

Its tin foil hat or one-eyedness to the point of blindness to say otherwise.

Personally I find it humourous that a goal can cause such mayhem but non calls or calls ten metres out which have equally obvious consequences are not triggering. The regularity with which umpiring decisions have bearings on matches is exhausting and I dont like to focus on umpires but its a nonsense to say they dont have major bearings on games

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

IMO the available footage is 100% conclusive. It was a goal.

Can you post an example that shows without a doubt the umpire was wrong?

Interestingly, Post # 819 on the previous page could certainly lead one to believe the ball hit the goalpost.