Invest in high definition slow motion cameras for the goal line or get rid of the review.

[Grockadoc]

The review system is currently a victim of the poor quality cameras the AFL use to determine score reviews. With such poor definition, fuzzy, grainy vision, poor frame rates, it makes it virtually impossible to overturn and if nearly every review goes to Umpires Call because of the vision, then it is just a waste of time and sticking to the umpires call in the first place leads to the same result but saves 1-2 minutes per review.

If they want to keep it, they need to invest in much better, hi def, slow mo cameras with much clearer footage in order to actually make it useful.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Consider the logic....

The umpire isn't certain of the decision. That is why they go to the video.

Yet the rule is that the umpire's decision stands!!

Is that the most idiotic thing you've ever heard in your life??

It's not like a video review where the umpire's decision is in dispute! That makes sense that you need to prove it incorrect!

But when the umpire is guessing, WTF does it have to be conclusive?? Surely the decision should just be made by the dude looking at the video?

 

[OnTheRocks]

Before hiring these knobs please make sure that they are not optically challenged knobs
Oh and yeah invest in slo mo hi def stuff too

 

[sobrave]

A go pro costing a few hundred bucks each strapped to the goal umpires head would do a better job than the shite they have now

 

[Duckenthusiast]

What I wanna know is why I can see the bowler's finger print on a ball in 1000000 fps watching a cricket replay, but a goal review makes players look like 2 fingered half-breeds.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

What I wanna know is why I can see the bowler's finger print on a ball in 1000000 fps watching a cricket replay, but a goal review makes players look like 2 fingered half-breeds.

To be fair, it was Vlastuin.

 

[HairyO]

Hi speed HD cameras are so cheap they could put 10 on every goal post.

That the AFL hasnt is just proof they dont care.

 

[theyellowsash]

Hi speed HD cameras are so cheap they could put 10 on every goal post.

That the AFL hasnt is just proof they dont care.

every half bit youtuber owns one so they can do slow motion videos of water balloons popping, yet the afl cant afford it at least for finals.

 

[matthew_s]

if we can fine players for faking for a free (staging) we should fine players for faking a touch on the goal line / off the boot.

both dishonest, unsportsmanlike acts.

 

[telsor]

I think the problem with the system is that the AFL threw it together 'overnight' in a knee jerk reaction to a couple of bad calls.

Corners obviously needed to be cut, so this is what we got.

Replacing it with top notch stuff at every AFL ground (and/or mobile equipment for the less commonly used grounds) would be expensive, not just for the cameras, but also the networking (that's a lot of data to transmit) and processing. It would probably also require replacing everything they've already done, so that cost (which wouldn't have been pocket change) is just thrown away.

Personally, I'd like to just go back to trusting the goal umps, and accepting that sometimes they'll get one wrong, but given some people seem to have an issue with that, you can either look at accepting the current system and getting 90% right, or spending millions on that last 10%.

 

[matthew_s]

I think the problem with the system is that the AFL threw it together 'overnight' in a knee jerk reaction to a couple of bad calls.

Corners obviously needed to be cut, so this is what we got.

Replacing it with top notch stuff at every AFL ground (and/or mobile equipment for the less commonly used grounds) would be expensive, not just for the cameras, but also the networking (that's a lot of data to transmit) and processing. It would probably also require replacing everything they've already done, so that cost (which wouldn't have been pocket change) is just thrown away.

Personally, I'd like to just go back to trusting the goal umps, and accepting that sometimes they'll get one wrong, but given some people seem to have an issue with that, you can either look at accepting the current system and getting 90% right, or spending millions on that last 10%.

I think people would be much more accepting of the current system if the calls reflected what the viewer sees on screen. Tonight was a pretty good example of that

 

[telsor]

I dont think people would be much more accepting of the current system if the calls reflected what the viewer sees on screen. Tonight was a pretty good example of that

I've heard plenty of disagreement about what people see on the screen...(not in this case so much, but certainly in many others).