News AFL admits wrong call on Sloane goal

[I Lost My Keays]

No Shit , Sherlock

It was obvious to the eye that it was a goal. Even the Richmond supporters who I was next to on the hill admitted it was goal!

AFL Goal Review Panel

 

[Go You Crows]

No Shit , Sherlock

It was obvious to the eye that it was a goal. Even the Richmond supporters who I was next to on the hill admitted it was goal!

AFL Goal Review Panel
View attachment 74412

I wonder who the umpire was that reviewed it?

 

[I Lost My Keays]

I wonder who the umpire was that reviewed it?

The bald one with glasses which doesn't have eyes

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Who are these anonymous clowns on goal review duty? Is it one of the AFL umpires?

In cricket they get test match umpires to do it and they are named, people know who they are.

The goal reviews are done by some secret organisation. No one knows who they are, there is no scrutiny for them, no repurcussions for getting it wrong. It was only revealed accidentally by an umpire (on field microphone) that they even do these reviews at all and that was halfway through the season.

 

[MRB37]

Has that ever happened before, where everyone thinks it's a goal, no one asks for a review, but then the goal review umpire overturns it?

Totally undermines the goal umpires too. They're already enough with the "I think it's a goal, I just want to check" time wasting crap. If an umpire backs himself in, then it's not needed IMO.

 

[Mattrox]

So can we cash in all our written apologies for poor officiating for 4 points?

I vote we save them up for next year. We might have a couple more by then.

 

[40porpoise]

In a sick twisted kind of way I wish we lost by less than a goal.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

Annoying, but we kicked another goal before Richmond cleared defence so didn't impact the result.

 

[Draft Bored]

Who's Wong?

 

[I Lost My Keays]

Annoying, but we kicked another goal before Richmond cleared defence so didn't impact the result.

It's not really the issue , what if we didn't get a goal afterwards?

 

[Elder van Berlo]

It's not really the issue , what if we didn't get a goal afterwards?

Then it would be even more annoying.

 

[The Karma Bus]

Who's Wong?

Damn wascally weviewer..

 

[jackster83]

Meh, they only admit they did wrong to placate the masses.

No accountability - they can stuff up week in, week out.

It's time we stopped pissing away money on this crap.

 

[PrideOf]

Who's Wong?

Well now we know who does the goal reviews at Adelaide Oval ...

 

[lincsPJ]

Who's Wong?

 

[lincsPJ]

too easy

 

[AFC3000]

So we start our next game against Richmond with a one goal advantage? no? thanks anyway AFL, great system you've got there.

 

[sbenno]

 

[bradydaw91]

Sounds like sour grapes to me from the supporters of a losing side. The attention that this incident received from supporters and the media is a joke in itself. This decision was obviously incorrect, but if you weigh up the umpiring overall. The crows had more line ball calls going their way throughout the night(28:17), including about 4 in the last quarter when they had momentum and Richmond were trying to stem the bleeding and the crows were winning dubious freekicks in their forward half.

 

[Tex200]

Annoying, but we kicked another goal before Richmond cleared defence so didn't impact the result.

I think it definitely impacts.

The goal had been recorded, the ball was in the middle and a new phase of play was to commence.

Then this idiot interferes. We will never know how the game would have unfolded from that point.

Yes we got a goal from the kick in - but who knows , we may have got a second goal from that centre clearance.

The natural course of the game was irrevocably altered. No one can say that dosent matter.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

Sounds like sour grapes to me from the supporters of a losing side. The attention that this incident received from supporters and the media is a joke in itself. This decision was obviously incorrect, but if you weigh up the umpiring overall. The crows had more line ball calls going their way throughout the night(28:17), including about 4 in the last quarter when they had momentum and Richmond were trying to stem the bleeding and the crows were winning dubious freekicks in their forward half.

You've made this point about 4 times on our board today. We get it. Now run along.

 

[Tex Danger]

Sounds like sour grapes to me from the supporters of a losing side. The attention that this incident received from supporters and the media is a joke in itself. This decision was obviously incorrect, but if you weigh up the umpiring overall. The crows had more line ball calls going their way throughout the night(28:17), including about 4 in the last quarter when they had momentum and Richmond were trying to stem the bleeding and the crows were winning dubious freekicks in their forward half.

it is a legitimate issue to discuss- not for the purpose of changing the result as most have noted, but it is a genuine discussion point for the good of the game. There have been handful of these situations throughout the year that make you scratch your head and wonder how the review system can be so wrong.

Was the Viney suspension early in the year talked about non stop because him missing a few weeks was going to cost the Dees games? no, it was because it was an issue for the game to sort out for the good of everyone. This is no different. The review system was there to stop howlers changing the result of the game (e.g. the hawkins hitting the post in the GF). Somehow it has gone from that to reviewing decisions that the goal ump is 100% confident with (which is ok if they got it totally wrong) to and overturning them with incorrect decisions.

Keep it simple I say- if its clear enough for the review to be made before the ball is bounced then overturn it. If we have to wait before bouncing so the review can be completed then its obviously not a clearly wrong call!

PS interesting to know where you get your stats on line ball decisions there...oh wait, thats the total free kick count and because we had more frees must mean that more 50-50s went our way and not that you guys gave away a lot of really obvious sloppy frees like high tackles. ok

 

[AFC3000]

Richmond fans hanging around longer than Port fans this week. Obviously enjoying 9th.

 

[Hank93]

We ended up kicking another point then a goal straight after, so it definitely didn't affect the result.

I'd actually lean towards it hitting the post, but not enough evidence to overturn it.

 

[anthc]

hav

Sounds like sour grapes to me from the supporters of a losing side. The attention that this incident received from supporters and the media is a joke in itself. This decision was obviously incorrect, but if you weigh up the umpiring overall. The crows had more line ball calls going their way throughout the night(28:17), including about 4 in the last quarter when they had momentum and Richmond were trying to stem the bleeding and the crows were winning dubious freekicks in their forward half.

have fun with ninth