Novak Djokovic wins French Open, will he win the Grand Slam?
Parallax errorThe kick is in line with the point post on right side.
The mark is taken midway the opposite point post and left goalpost
That is clearly 2 x 6.4m + 3m from where Cameron marked it.
There arent many people arguimg about it not be ing 15. Why are you? The facts are there.
Remember you originally stated sidea was only 7m. Its 10m. The goal squareis 9m long.
There is footage from behind the goal of the umpire closest to the ball off the boot signalling "touched".No it wasn't. Have gone back and watched it a few times.
It is hard to hear exactly what the ump says, but it is definitely two words repeated twice, not the same word repeated 4 times. It sounds a whole more like "not 15 not 15" than "touched touched touched touched".
Then before the camera angle pans past the ump the ball had cleared the contest and was in the goal square. Ball kicked with 12 seconds to go, ump pans out with 10 seconds. The ump has not made a call, if it was touched they call it almost instantly.
Finally when the ump comes up to Cameron to signal the throw in he doesn't indicate it was touched by tapping one hand against the other. They always do that.
Here is more clear audio;
Probably win is a huge stretch.Except of course that it did cos if it was called correctly then geelong probably win. That’s what costing a game is.
That wasn't holding the ball. If you want to see holding the ball I'd encourage you to watch the brisbane replay where blicavs got spun 720 and then just dropped the ball directly in front goal.He is a left footer. Would of been fine. Plus there was another 15 seconds on the clock anyway.
Also doesnt explain the non holding the vall decision 20 m out from goal directly in front. The ump was in the motion of calling it but got stage fright when the bell went.
It’s a really weird call by the umpireHere is more clear audio;
Very obvious 'play on not 15, play on not 15'
Regarding the umpire signalling touched, that is true but he was signalling touched before the player that kicked the ball even took possession so no idea how he could see into the future or he was signalling something else.
Sounds like the umpire just didn’t want Geelong to win and was desperately trying to find a reason. It was neither touched nor less then the required distance. not even close.It’s a really weird call by the umpire
Sounds like “touched, play on, touched, play on, not 15, play on, not 15”
Some people need to understand what winning a game is. Winning a game means you win by 1 point or more. You don’t need to win by 4 goals plus to win.Even though the AFL admit a fook up, once again this just disguises Chris Scott's ineptitude . This incident did not cost Geelong the game
Both were clearly holding the ball.That wasn't holding the ball. If you want to see holding the ball I'd encourage you to watch the brisbane replay where blicavs got spun 720 and then just dropped the ball directly in front goal.
Well you explain it then? You can’t. Has anyone ever seen a kick with that distance and hang time not been a called a mark. I’ve never seen it. I’ve seen ones half the distance paid as marks though.Put on the tin foil hat
I believe the kick travelled further than 15m. It has been analysed to death.Well you explain it then? You can’t. Has anyone ever seen a kick with that distance and hang time not been a called a mark. I’ve never seen it. I’ve seen ones half the distance paid as marks though.
fairy tale swans win was about to happen. Umpires were spooked.