docks
Premium Platinum
Why are you even here?
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Roast Goal review
- Thread starter Soaring Magpie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Kirby
Shambolic Rube
Veteran
Collingwood - Beau McCreery Player Sponsor 2023
10k Posts
Collingwood - Caleb Poulter Player Sponsor 2022
Collingwood - Josh Daicos Player Sponsor 2021
Collingwood - Tyler Brown Player Sponsor 2020
Collingwood Magpies - Brayden Sier 2019 Player Sponsor
Collingwood - Jaidyn Stephenson Player Sponsor 2018
Are you daft? He has his whole body on the camera side of the post and he doesn’t appear to be up against the post. The ball had forward momentum. It hit him on about the right hip already halfway across the line.
Was the ball suddenly going to move directly full right?
It was a bad decision
Should have been a goal. The whole review system is flawed beyond belief. Farcical. But we were farcical tonight, so at least it's consistent.
docks
Premium Platinum
They should name who makes these decisions & which team they follow.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Lol, he is up against the post, none of the ball is yet over the line and it’s got very little distance to travel, there is no way that entire ball misses the post, it would need a 90 degree turn mid air to miss!
But I’ll assume you’re blind because it hit his left hip!
docks
Premium Platinum
They have already ticked it off as a correct decision.
New rule as of 5 years ago is if it hits the umpire and would have gone through it’s a goal
- May 27, 2010
- 21,451
- 28,949
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
He's a Collingwood supporter. For some reason he just has the eagles as his team ever since that day.
The Royal Sampler
Floreat Pica, Bitch!
As egregious as it was to overturn the goal umpire's decision so quickly based upon that evidence, we got a free goal from a bullshit decision in Callum Brown's favour later anyway.
First contact was over the shoulder. The dangerous tackle call was bullshit but seen those over the shoulder ones paid 1000 times
A mate of one does the score reviews. He said that they have many more camera angles available to them than the spectators do at home and on the ground. He also was in charge for Higgins’ mark against us this year.
Even so, the rule should be that the goal umpire needs to make a call- goal or behind. It should only be used in situations where the ball may have hit the post, or has clearly gone through for a behind/goal and is adjudicated incorrectly. Not for marks on the line, not for touched on the line (May concede this one), definitely not for touched in play (field umpire and goal umpire to call this one).
Even so, the rule should be that the goal umpire needs to make a call- goal or behind. It should only be used in situations where the ball may have hit the post, or has clearly gone through for a behind/goal and is adjudicated incorrectly. Not for marks on the line, not for touched on the line (May concede this one), definitely not for touched in play (field umpire and goal umpire to call this one).
- May 27, 2010
- 21,451
- 28,949
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
docks
Premium Platinum
The goal umpire actually moves His left leg as it hits him as he is trying to get out of the way. It shouldn’t happen in this ‘billion dollar’industry.
docks
Premium Platinum
If they have better footage it should be shown for the sake of transparency.
docks
Premium Platinum
Well that’s as confusing as the decision lolHe's a Collingwood supporter. For some reason he just has the eagles as his team ever since that day.
If they have more angles the AFL would show them to support the decision. It’s a crap system that was never needed and it has got another wrong
Umpired called it a goal, he wanted to check if it would hit the post.
Reviewer confused or didn't want a Collingwood goal, didn't have anywhere near enough evidence to over rule the original decision.
Trajectory shows it was not even close to hitting the post and in fact was mostly already past the line, watch the replay, any down syndrome monkey can see it was a goal.
Then paying holding the ball directly in front of Dons goals when I think it was Shazza, didn't even touch the ball.... That's a new one, paid holding the ball without touching it, never seen that before, now we have.
Many disgusting decisions all over the ground both ways, horrible to watch.
Doesn't change the fact that this team is soft, when oppositions go hard this team crumbles and doesn't want to go in hard, lost the mojo, letting teams get a run on when they get momentum instead of keeping control until we get a structure we like.
Horrible display of clearances all over the ground too, oppositions can read Grundy and Cox taps better than our own players.
I could go on, should have been Varcoe in younger Brown out 3 games ago, now surely it's Sier in Brown out???
I dunno, maybe they see/know something I don't?
Anyway, they'll find their mojo, these guys are too talented to be playing this inconsistent for too long.
Might cost us a top 2 or top 4, but surely not top 8.
Reviewer confused or didn't want a Collingwood goal, didn't have anywhere near enough evidence to over rule the original decision.
Trajectory shows it was not even close to hitting the post and in fact was mostly already past the line, watch the replay, any down syndrome monkey can see it was a goal.
Then paying holding the ball directly in front of Dons goals when I think it was Shazza, didn't even touch the ball.... That's a new one, paid holding the ball without touching it, never seen that before, now we have.
Many disgusting decisions all over the ground both ways, horrible to watch.
Doesn't change the fact that this team is soft, when oppositions go hard this team crumbles and doesn't want to go in hard, lost the mojo, letting teams get a run on when they get momentum instead of keeping control until we get a structure we like.
Horrible display of clearances all over the ground too, oppositions can read Grundy and Cox taps better than our own players.
I could go on, should have been Varcoe in younger Brown out 3 games ago, now surely it's Sier in Brown out???
I dunno, maybe they see/know something I don't?
Anyway, they'll find their mojo, these guys are too talented to be playing this inconsistent for too long.
Might cost us a top 2 or top 4, but surely not top 8.
I have noticed goal umpires do everything in their power to not get hit by that ball. They jump/twist/turn to avoid it. During the score review they showed the goal umpire next to the field umpire and I could have sworn the look on his face was absolute mortification. He looked like he wanted to crawl into a hole. Felt bad for him.
- Apr 2, 2013
- 13,067
- 21,103
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
True. But wtf do goal umps insist on standing against the post. Stand side on a cm behind the line and you have no problem
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Apr 2, 2013
- 13,067
- 21,103
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Didn't know that. In that case goal imo.or umps call. Or just stand behind the line and problem goes
I swear the goal reviewer is Wayne Harmes, poking the stick or stoking our burning ashes.
Seriously have we had one favourable review yet?
Seriously have we had one favourable review yet?
barrackers
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 4, 2016
- 12,576
- 22,440
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Can’t remember the player, but there was an obvious high tackle that lead to the ball up inside our 50 and subsequently a free to Brown. I sensed the Brown free was a square up for missing one in the previous contest.
The called dangerous tackle and that was incredibly soft
sr36
TheBrownDog
Are you trolling, or do you not understand that the ball was coming from a different angle than the camera?
Inexplicable decision, unless the rule reads that it has to be an absolute certainty to be deemed a goal.