sme of the recent reviews im convinced its a way for the cheating umpires to get together and decide who wins, utter bullshit. now can we get the extra 2 for the richmond game, because clearly the ball was marked in the 2nd tier of the stands!
Goal Review
- Thread starter Tasmanian saint
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Malibu#27
Premium Platinum
It wouldn't have been an issue if Dougal had showed some defensive awareness and either covered the goal mouth, or chased it back with any form of urgency. (He was just jogging back until he worked out it was going through for a goal)
Umpire was in a perfect position
Umpire was in a perfect position
check the goal review in the eagles vs bombers game a minute before half time tonight.
you will rarely get a better example of what should be a simple bread and butter goal line review...but the footage is blurrier than any ufo or Bigfoot footage you've ever seen.
* me, the afl don't give a * about the game.
you will rarely get a better example of what should be a simple bread and butter goal line review...but the footage is blurrier than any ufo or Bigfoot footage you've ever seen.
* me, the afl don't give a * about the game.
People have said on this thread that the goal review we have is "better than nothing".
Well, the one last night in the Bombers game was nothing. The footage was so poor that it was inconclusive. You couldn't tell when the ball was touched or even if it was touched.
The AFL relented on the lack of camera tech in Darwin and have said they'll put it at every ground. It's as if they couldn't forsee a situation where the lack of goal line cameras might lead to controversy.
Perhaps they should get onto the front foot and make sure the quality of footage coming out of the cameras can actually do the job they are designed for before last night's situation happens in a close final.
Well, the one last night in the Bombers game was nothing. The footage was so poor that it was inconclusive. You couldn't tell when the ball was touched or even if it was touched.
The AFL relented on the lack of camera tech in Darwin and have said they'll put it at every ground. It's as if they couldn't forsee a situation where the lack of goal line cameras might lead to controversy.
Perhaps they should get onto the front foot and make sure the quality of footage coming out of the cameras can actually do the job they are designed for before last night's situation happens in a close final.
People have said on this thread that the goal review we have is "better than nothing".
Well, the one last night in the Bombers game was nothing. The footage was so poor that it was inconclusive. You couldn't tell when the ball was touched or even if it was touched.
The AFL relented on the lack of camera tech in Darwin and have said they'll put it at every ground. It's as if they couldn't forsee a situation where the lack of goal line cameras might lead to controversy.
Perhaps they should get onto the front foot and make sure the quality of footage coming out of the cameras can actually do the job they are designed for before last night's situation happens in a close final.
was ******* embarrassing watching that last night.
thankfully it didn't impact the result in the end.
- Jan 3, 2012
- 43,625
- 88,689
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea FC, Victory, All Blecks,
- Jan 3, 2012
- 43,625
- 88,689
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea FC, Victory, All Blecks,
Their statement about not being able to foresee a goal line issue is a insult to people’s intelligence, fifa said the same thing in the 2010 World Cup, yet that type of incident had happened in the 1966 World Cup final.......as well as thousands of other times around the world , but no we didn’t foresee that happening, and it’s not the first time it’s happened in the aflPeople have said on this thread that the goal review we have is "better than nothing".
Well, the one last night in the Bombers game was nothing. The footage was so poor that it was inconclusive. You couldn't tell when the ball was touched or even if it was touched.
The AFL relented on the lack of camera tech in Darwin and have said they'll put it at every ground. It's as if they couldn't forsee a situation where the lack of goal line cameras might lead to controversy.
Perhaps they should get onto the front foot and make sure the quality of footage coming out of the cameras can actually do the job they are designed for before last night's situation happens in a close final.
You forgot missing overlooking Dusty... twice!Mate this post might be funny if it wasn’t coming from a Melbourne supporter a club that has had some of ta
this post might actually be funny if it wasn’t coming from a Melbourne supporter your club has had some of the biggest draft mistakes in history did you forget about jack watts over Nic Nat taking cale morton top 5 , swapping the josh Kelly pick for a hack like Don Tyson. As for coaches Goodwin wouldn’t be fit to do up rattens shoe laces for as a coach . We had plenty of passengers on the wknd but dougal Howard was actually one of our better players shows how much you watch a game
The irony reading this today.
Like every other sport the AFL review system is a joke because it is there to verify an umpires decision and not necessarily to get the right decision
The one in the Eagles Bombers game showed this, now in my opinion I yhink the end decision was probably correct but what should happen is the umpires all must be removed.
The goal umpire should simply say I don’t know if it’s a goal or if it’s touched. Now it’s up to the ARC totally. By having the goal umpire make a call the ARC really has no other job than to confirm the umpire was close to being right.
Just get rid of umpires call totally and the system could be better.
The one in the Eagles Bombers game showed this, now in my opinion I yhink the end decision was probably correct but what should happen is the umpires all must be removed.
The goal umpire should simply say I don’t know if it’s a goal or if it’s touched. Now it’s up to the ARC totally. By having the goal umpire make a call the ARC really has no other job than to confirm the umpire was close to being right.
Just get rid of umpires call totally and the system could be better.
absolute joke of a system. yes it cost the eagles and the mark paid to Bont was also less than 10m.
further, if darling had kicked the goal from his free kick, the dogs would have been just as robbed as the eagles have been.
afl is the ******* definition of amateur.
They got what they wanted. No top 4, they all earned their bonuses.
Yamumluvsbigcox
Cancelled
- Oct 22, 2012
- 8,714
- 14,107
- AFL Club
- West Coast
There are only 4 venues being used atm . That's 8 sets of good goal line cameras needed .
You could kit them out with the Richmond covid breach fines alone
You could kit them out with the Richmond covid breach fines alone
- Sep 25, 2012
- 2,200
- 3,219
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Arsenal, Miami Heat
I'm absolutely baffled by lack of technology.
Insufficient evidence is basically saying "we don't have the technology available to confirm the act". We have a national sport, a huge one, and we don't have the technology available to take the question out of it.
Tonight's game;
Why can't snicko be implemented to see if the ball touches hands? If it can be implemented to see if touches a post, it's the exact same technology. There shouldn't be any doubt with the ball touching or not touching any of it.
SURELY the goal umpire knows there's only one camera angle and thats between the goals...yet he calls for a review on something that there is no way of seeing the camera angle cuz it's between the behind posts. I'm confused by this as well.
Why have the review system if most decisions go back to the umpires call due to the lack of technology?
Why can't the AFL implement goal line technology like soccer uses? It's definitive. And it would've given a difinitive answer to the Bont goal last week.
Insufficient evidence is basically saying "we don't have the technology available to confirm the act". We have a national sport, a huge one, and we don't have the technology available to take the question out of it.
Tonight's game;
Why can't snicko be implemented to see if the ball touches hands? If it can be implemented to see if touches a post, it's the exact same technology. There shouldn't be any doubt with the ball touching or not touching any of it.
SURELY the goal umpire knows there's only one camera angle and thats between the goals...yet he calls for a review on something that there is no way of seeing the camera angle cuz it's between the behind posts. I'm confused by this as well.
Why have the review system if most decisions go back to the umpires call due to the lack of technology?
Why can't the AFL implement goal line technology like soccer uses? It's definitive. And it would've given a difinitive answer to the Bont goal last week.
at this point, I'm convinced its the AFL trying to * the eagles! ;-)
but yeah, it does really seem like a waste of time,
- Mar 11, 2012
- 6,745
- 16,754
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Southampton FC, LSU
It would've been interesting if the score review came back to umpire's call. It should have gone back to Dangerfield since there was no advantage if Parfitt didn't touch it, but I'm not sure it would have.
There needs to be better consultation between field and goal umpires in those situations. We had one against Saints where goal umpire said Membrey didn't touch it, but if that was the case then it should've been a free against him for an unrealistic marking attempt.
Similar threads
