Game Day Power v Eagles. - Ducks go quack and Drew lives to fight another day.

[FastLife]

Great to see Drew going well. True Shinboner.

 

[archereleven]

THE AFL has given its tick of approval to the umpiring decision that led to Luke Shuey’s post-siren matchwinner on Saturday night.
Port Adelaide’s Jared Polec was adjudged to have tackled Shuey high in the dying seconds of the elimination final, sparking mass debate regarding the merits of umpire Chris Donlon’s decision.

When contacted by foxfooty.com.au on Sunday, AFL spokesman Patrick Keane said the league was content with the call.

“The view of the umpire’s department is that the free was warranted,” Keane toldfoxfooty.com.au.

“Both the officiating umpire, Chris Donlon, and the other umpire nearby felt that there was significant high contact for a free-kick and the AFL shares this view.”

AFL greats Dermott Brereton, Jordan Lewis and Cameron Mooney were critical of the decision on Fox Footy after West Coast’s nailbiting victory.

Even Eagle Andrew Gaff was unsure of the decision and conceded that the call may have ‘evened up’ earlier decisions.

Shuey himself played a straight bat when asked about it on Sunday afternoon.

“I haven’t really got an opinion on it,” Shuey said.

“It’s irrelvent to us now and we move on and focus on next week.”

That was the article that prompted me to post a reply above. The hypocrisy is astounding and just the way the AFL likes it. The more muddied and murky the water is the better in their opinion...

 

[Gasometer]

Kochy telling supporters if players dont want to play for Premierships they can see ya later.

 

[the big lebowski]

Barrett actually tried to argue with 3 ex players on TSFS this morning that Polec's tackle didn't start legal.

Didn't start legal? They freeze framed it perfectly legal. Damos lost the plot.

Though maybe it's going around at the moment. Big nose basil and the crew were flabbergasted at the first goal review despite wingards boot being clearly the last thing to touch it before it went through.

Am I taking crazy pills here?

 

[Groin guru]

Unsurprisingly from the AFL. If they admitted it was wrong people would be up in arms. They police themselves and bend the rules to suit their agenda. If it's clear cut they hide behind "hard to judge in real-time" or if it goes against them they slow it down and suspend players (whilst hiding behind the "you can't use past instances to back up your points").

Shuey is a POS. Not a free.

 

[Unity-28]

Unsurprisingly from the AFL. If they admitted it was wrong people would be up in arms. They police themselves and bend the rules to suit their agenda. If it's clear cut they hide behind "hard to judge in real-time" or if it goes against them they slow it down and suspend players (whilst hiding behind the "you can't use past instances to back up your points").

Shuey is a POS. Not a free.

100% agree....
except, the nor a free part. that was a free. im sorry, but if a player is strong enough to raise their arm to try and break the tackle, and while doing so get taken high, its a free. polec (or anyone for that matter) has to be stronger to hold he arm down.
whether shuey was playing for a free or not is debatable, but if it was one of our guys, we'd be wanting that free paid.

we are all (rightfully so btw) annoyed at the different treatment that sheuy, selwood etc get, compared to LT, as if that was lindsay, the media would be calling for him to be deregistered.

 

[Mav]

100% agree....
except, the nor a free part. that was a free. im sorry, but if a player is strong enough to raise their arm to try and break the tackle, and while doing so get taken high, its a free. polec (or anyone for that matter) has to be stronger to hold he arm down.
whether shuey was playing for a free or not is debatable, but if it was one of our guys, we'd be wanting that free paid.

we are all (rightfully so btw) annoyed at the different treatment that sheuy, selwood etc get, compared to LT, as if that was lindsay, the media would be calling for him to be deregistered.

You can be sorry all you like but the AFL's own laws of the game video clearly shows it's not a free. I just can't see how anyone can argue that.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

100% agree....
except, the nor a free part. that was a free. im sorry, but if a player is strong enough to raise their arm to try and break the tackle, and while doing so get taken high, its a free. polec (or anyone for that matter) has to be stronger to hold he arm down.
whether shuey was playing for a free or not is debatable, but if it was one of our guys, we'd be wanting that free paid.

we are all (rightfully so btw) annoyed at the different treatment that sheuy, selwood etc get, compared to LT, as if that was lindsay, the media would be calling for him to be deregistered.

Except that tackle was their exact example of what would no longer be a free - the tackle wasn't high until the tackled player's actions made it high = play on, or HTB. Couldn't be happy for him given his history, even though it was not an easy goal under pressure.

 

[astrovic]

I don't get the AFL sometimes.

Umpiring is bloody difficult. We all know that. Umpiring the last minute of an extended time cut throat elimination final under enormous pressure with fatigue well and truly set in is extra bloody difficult.

The AFL could work on building a narrative around how hard umpiring is, that umpires are human, they're not always going to get it 100% right, the AFL is constantly trying to introduce ways to make their jobs easier and their decisions more consistent yadda yadda yadda, but while we wouldn't be happy with bad decisions (especially against our own team) we'd cop it.

Instead their approach is to just come out and say the umpire is always right, even when everyone can tell he isn't, even when the decision contradicts the AFL's own rule change and throwing the meaning of the rule change into even more doubt - all of which leaves no-one any more happy with bad decisions and even worse, confused and mistrusting of the AFL and umpires. It is such a self-defeating approach.

It's a situation where in a choice between two approaches neither of which have good outcomes, the one involving being honest about the shitness is far more preferable.

 

[Caracas]

Bottom line, Umpires are always going to call it as they see it. Everybody has to deal with it. Tight game, last seconds, if it's in your backline, you're in danger - that's the game... In real time, I couldn't see anything, except a high tackle. It took me ages to identify that the tackle had started lower. The advantage/curse of slow motion...

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Bottom line, Umpires are always going to call it as they see it. Everybody has to deal with it. Tight game, last seconds, if it's in your backline, you're in danger - that's the game... In real time, I couldn't see anything, except a high tackle. It took me ages to identify that the tackle had started lower. The advantage/curse of slow motion...

I think everyone is the same. And most people would sympathise with the umpire and accept the split second call. As astroboy says, it's a perfect opportunity to put us all in the umpires shoes and the AFL chooses instead to claim it's a 100% correct decision and leave the rest of us confused and mistrustful.

 

[Mav]

Bottom line, Umpires are always going to call it as they see it. Everybody has to deal with it. Tight game, last seconds, if it's in your backline, you're in danger - that's the game... In real time, I couldn't see anything, except a high tackle. It took me ages to identify that the tackle had started lower. The advantage/curse of slow motion...

It comes down to the view of the ump and their line of site. The ump that called the free is on the other side of the tackle to the arm raise, as is the main camera angle. The controlling ump from the throw in was on the move but had Polec in the way which could have stopped him from seeing it. Its a hard call but the umps got it wrong and the AFL needs to come out and say so, otherwise everyone is confused. Looking at comments on-line, its clear that most people don't even know that raising the arm makes it play on.

As someone quoted above, the AFL is happy to slow down footage for tackles and end up suspending players because of it (despite at the time umps called fair tackle in real time) but in this instance they are saying, "Oh but you have to look at the decision in real time". If we're going to base all umpires decision on real time then * off the goal reviews.

 

[ferball]

As someone quoted above, the AFL is happy to slow down footage for tackles and end up suspending players because of it (despite at the time umps called fair tackle in real time) but in this instance they are saying, "Oh but you have to look at the decision in real time". If we're going to base all umpires decision on real time then **** off the goal reviews.

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the decision the "look at it in real time" thing is a fair call. Umpires don't have the luxury of replays to base their decision on because the game is ongoing. The see something in real time and have to make a call, and as we all know humans get this stuff wrong. The only reason goal reviews happen is because they involve a defined break in play and tribunal decisions are made after the game using all available evidence.

I agree the AFL should come out and say the umps got it wrong tho but then they'd have to point out that its a completely reasonable mistake and have to deal with the consequences of admitting a team got put out of finals because of a mistake. Port fans might not like it but reasonable people would understand at least. (And yes, if it happened to us I'd be very shitty #1994)

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the decision if you are tackling someone in the last minute of a sudden death final in front of their goal and you feel your tackle slip high let go straight away. Don't hold on while the player spins and makes incidental high contact look like an attempted coat hanger. FFS don't give the umps any more excuse than you possibly can. This happens alot in our game, players should be learning by now. Polec maintained high contact with Shuey for more than the split second his arm slipped up to Shuey's head. That made the whole thing look worse than it was.

Naturally none of this applies when we are playing.

 

[Mav]

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the decision the "look at it in real time" thing is a fair call. Umpires don't have the luxury of replays to base their decision on because the game is ongoing. The see something in real time and have to make a call, and as we all know humans get this stuff wrong. The only reason goal reviews happen is because they involve a defined break in play and tribunal decisions are made after the game using all available evidence.

I agree the AFL should come out and say the umps got it wrong tho but then they'd have to point out that its a completely reasonable mistake and have to deal with the consequences of admitting a team got put out of finals because of a mistake. Port fans might not like it but reasonable people would understand at least. (And yes, if it happened to us I'd be very shitty #1994)

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the decision if you are tackling someone in the last minute of a sudden death final in front of their goal and you feel your tackle slip high let go straight away. Don't hold on while the player spins and makes incidental high contact look like an attempted coat hanger. FFS don't give the umps any more excuse than you possibly can. This happens alot in our game, players should be learning by now. Polec maintained high contact with Shuey for more than the split second his arm slipped up to Shuey's head. That made the whole thing look worse than it was.

Naturally none of this applies when we are playing.

Mate, I've stood up for the umps more than anyone on this board and I understand how hard it is. But players cant just let go straight away when they feel the tackle slip high....in real time! The problem with Shuey is that he exaggerates the high contact by spinning and throwing the head back. The ump should be looking at where the tackle first starts, in this case I don't think they could see it so the high was given.

One of the issues is that umps can't go in with preconceived views on how players act and need to pay every free how they see it (unless you're Buddy Franklin and have a 'natural arc' when kicking for goal!). They cant assume that the Shuey lifted his arm, and if they didn't see it then they pay the free. But not seeing something doesn't make it the right decision.

Someone needs to get Schwab if raising the arm in a tackle is allowed, and if not why is this case not play on.

 

[astrovic]

Bottom line, Umpires are always going to call it as they see it. Everybody has to deal with it. Tight game, last seconds, if it's in your backline, you're in danger - that's the game... In real time, I couldn't see anything, except a high tackle. It took me ages to identify that the tackle had started lower. The advantage/curse of slow motion...

I kinda sorta agree. I mean yeah you're right in isolation, but at the same time that can only work so long as the AFL remains committed to reducing umpire error in every conceivable way.

Taking this incident - whether the ump in real time saw the arm lift or not depended on what angle the ump had to the action. If he had the same angle as the first camera, yeah he would have trouble spotting it. If he had the same angle as the second camera, which was more front-on, then he really shouldn't miss it, even in real time. Is that just "one of those things" or could something have been done better?

The question then becomes, is there a way to address that? We have 3 field umpires, were they all in the right positions? Are the positions they are being trained to take up the right ones? Do we need more field umpires (gut reaction - oh hells no)? Do we need a video review system (slows down the play but would have made a huge difference here)? Do umpires need to be full time? All rhetorical questions in the here and now, but real questions that the AFL should always be looking at. They do, but not hard enough IMO.

So long as the AFL remain committed to this - not just the constant rule tinkering and bland platitudes we currently get - I reckon we'd all wear the inevitable errors a lot better than where things are currently.

 

[Kimbo]

I kinda sorta agree. I mean yeah you're right in isolation, but at the same time that can only work so long as the AFL remains committed to reducing umpire error in every conceivable way.

Taking this incident - whether the ump in real time saw the arm lift or not depended on what angle the ump had to the action. If he had the same angle as the first camera, yeah he would have trouble spotting it. If he had the same angle as the second camera, which was more front-on, then he really shouldn't miss it, even in real time. Is that just "one of those things" or could something have been done better?

The question then becomes, is there a way to address that? We have 3 field umpires, were they all in the right positions? Are the positions they are being trained to take up the right ones? Do we need more field umpires (gut reaction - oh hells no)? Do we need a video review system (slows down the play but would have made a huge difference here)? Do umpires need to be full time? All rhetorical questions in the here and now, but real questions that the AFL should always be looking at. They do, but not hard enough IMO.

So long as the AFL remain committed to this - not just the constant rule tinkering and bland platitudes we currently get - I reckon we'd all wear the inevitable errors a lot better than where things are currently.

Got to protect the AFL bland... platitudes.

Good phrase actually, perfectly sums up their media approach.

 

[muttley45]

Re. Mr Shuey, just like old mate Kale Hooker, the Footy Gods/Karma bus will no doubt make a statement in due course.

 

[Firestarter]

Re. Mr Shuey, just like old mate Kale Hooker, the Footy Gods/Karma bus will no doubt make a statement in due course.

Cale.

 

[muttley45]

Cale.

No, sorry, i prefer Kale for that particular campaigner

 

[WA ROO]

West Coast supporters now calling Petrie "Our Drewey"

 

[Firestarter]

West Coast supporters now calling Petrie "Our Drewey"

Gross. Hope none of us changed our minds about how much we hate them.

 

[Saintly_]

Great to see Dish play well.

Good on him

 

[Caracas]

It comes down to the view of the ump and their line of site. The ump that called the free is on the other side of the tackle to the arm raise, as is the main camera angle. The controlling ump from the throw in was on the move but had Polec in the way which could have stopped him from seeing it. Its a hard call but the umps got it wrong and the AFL needs to come out and say so, otherwise everyone is confused. Looking at comments on-line, its clear that most people don't even know that raising the arm makes it play on.

As someone quoted above, the AFL is happy to slow down footage for tackles and end up suspending players because of it (despite at the time umps called fair tackle in real time) but in this instance they are saying, "Oh but you have to look at the decision in real time". If we're going to base all umpires decision on real time then **** off the goal reviews.

Fair point(s) KT.

 

[Roozee]

West Coast supporters now calling Petrie "Our Drewey"

Probably payback for when we were calling McKinley "Our Benny"

 

[jimandphilbadge]

Probably payback for when we were calling McKinley "Our Benny"

And who can forget when Their Arron Edwards had that 100 goal season!