Guessing the 15 metre rule

Remove this Banner Ad

SunshineBoy

๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†
Jan 3, 2012
29,942
57,282
In Covid Free wilderness
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea FC, Victory, All Blecks
goal post width is 6.4m so it's about 2 but we will call it 13m to be generous, side b is 7m at best but prob less

that means the other side is 14.76m correct call play on
Wasnโ€™t the diagram I found on Gerard whateleys desk enough?

0B18D904-3B2E-4003-AC09-4B517BC945D9.png
 

SunshineBoy

๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†
Jan 3, 2012
29,942
57,282
In Covid Free wilderness
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea FC, Victory, All Blecks
The 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.
Parallax error
 

Log in to remove this ad.

RobbieGray17

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 19, 2007
12,097
6,395
adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Looks like I don't need to. The AFL admitted they got it wrong. Just looked over the highlights that you or anyone else can see, and yep, in the exact spot I pointed out.
 

SunshineBoy

๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†
Jan 3, 2012
29,942
57,282
In Covid Free wilderness
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Chelsea FC, Victory, All Blecks
Itโ€™s amazing anyone dare criticise the umpires and itโ€™s fire and brimstone, but the betting company board member can say the umps got ittwrong
 

Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods

Sir Cripps of Carlton House
Mar 26, 2015
7,390
12,655
Bendigo
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Melbourne Tigers Philadelphia 76ers
The umpire called play on for something. The commentators were speculating that it was not 15m because they couldn't hear it.
To me it sounded like he said touched. The umps are mic'd. Have they spoken to the umpire or isolated the ump's mic to find out what he was calling?
If he called not 15, then fair enough, they got it wrong. If he called touched, then it literally makes no difference how far it went.

Was a shocking one in the Blues v Dons game. Essendon player barely kicked it 9m right near our goals and was allowed as a mark.
 

ashep

Premiership Player
Jun 15, 2014
3,608
7,229
AFL Club
Sydney
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.
There is footage from behind the goal of the umpire closest to the ball off the boot signalling "touched".

It's unabmiguous unlike the audio.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Wojcinski

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
14,350
20,917
AFL Club
Geelong
There is footage from behind the goal of the umpire closest to the ball off the boot signalling "touched".

It's unabmiguous unlike the audio.
Here 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.
 

keithrichards

Club Legend
Dec 11, 2008
2,595
3,001
Shepparton
AFL Club
Melbourne
Except of course that it did cos if it was called correctly then geelong probably win. Thatโ€™s what costing a game is.
Probably win is a huge stretch.

They were cost a shot at goal, but to think Jeremy Cameron kicks that goal from that position, without the ability to run around off the line, is a massive assumption to make.

EDIT: Iโ€™d be far more filthy at Tom Hawkinsโ€™ effort in the last then any of the umpires. Missed some shots he should have got, and a dropped mark directly in front.
 

sobrave

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 15, 2015
16,333
33,077
42ยฐ south
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
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.
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.
 

harrythetiger

Jack Graham That Is ๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†
Sep 13, 2015
16,143
43,975
Hillary Step
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76ers
Here 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.
Itโ€™s a really weird call by the umpire
Sounds like โ€œtouched, play on, touched, play on, not 15, play on, not 15โ€
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,197
36,186
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Itโ€™s a really weird call by the umpire
Sounds like โ€œtouched, play on, touched, play on, not 15, play on, not 15โ€
Sounds like the umpire just didnโ€™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.
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,197
36,186
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
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
Some people need to understand what winning a game is. Winning a game means you win by 1 point or more. You donโ€™t need to win by 4 goals plus to win.
 
Last edited:

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
40,197
36,186
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
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.
Both were clearly holding the ball.

you canโ€™t just dive on the ball and literally do nothing. He didnโ€™t even attempt one of those fake handball attempts that arenโ€™t really attempts but made to look like one. He just sat there stone cold like a deer in the headlights.

ps. The Blicavs holding the ball situation (which was definitely both holding and throwing the ball) only happened cos the umpire didnโ€™t pay a stone cold throw from neale 40 seconds earlier on the back flank. The ball should of been in geelongs fifty instead.

if Both games were umpired correctly in the last 2 mins then Geelong wins both games.
 

harrythetiger

Jack Graham That Is ๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†๐Ÿ†
Sep 13, 2015
16,143
43,975
Hillary Step
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76ers
Well you explain it then? You canโ€™t. Has anyone ever seen a kick with that distance and hang time not been a called a mark. Iโ€™ve never seen it. Iโ€™ve seen ones half the distance paid as marks though.

fairy tale swans win was about to happen. Umpires were spooked.
I believe the kick travelled further than 15m. It has been analysed to death.
I do not know whether or not it was touched, and Iโ€™m kind of sure the umpire called touched. I would like to see further analysis and better camera angles of it to find out.
 

Remove this Banner Ad