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!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
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.I acknowledge the pain and suffering it must cause St Kilda's fans to see stars like Angus Brayshaw, Jake Lever, Ed Langdon and of course Christian Petracca perform to such a high standard, knowing that in the same draft their recruiting team took a punt on an overweight key forward who sadly didn't make it to 50 games. And I can confirm the score review system at this stadium fails to meet what one would reasonably assume is a professional standard. However I will now provide a list of other unprofessional items on display during this match that St Kilda fans may want to direct their anger at instead:
* Brad Hill's waistline.
* Dougal Howard's awareness.
* Brett Ratten's absence of an alternative game-plan to the one that was demonstrably worked out weeks ago.
* Timothy Membrey's tattoos.
I hope this helps. Thank you.
Goal review has just cost West Coast the season. Did they use the reverse angle?
They got what they wanted. No top 4, they all earned their bonuses.Goal review has just cost West Coast the season. Did they use the reverse angle?
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.
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.People were angry with the Goal Review where Parfitt was given a goal, but how could it be paid "advantage" if the swans player kicked it? So the opposition can take the advantage now?