PSA: ARC can now call for reviews 90sec after the event

[Lavender Bushranger]

90 seconds is way too long to come to a decision..

I don't know how long it was, but that seems to be the only legitimate complaint about what happened today. That the ARC guy just took too long to review it.

Everything else that people are upset about is quite misplaced.

 

[oak79]

But what's the difference? The goal umpire today should have called for a review. And we would have had to wait 60 seconds for the ARC guy to do his thing, then Marshall would ha E kicked the goal.

I stead there was about 30 seconds of pretty much dead footy that we sat through, then ended up with the exact same result.


Since the Adelaide debacle a couple of years ago, they have to review all goal line activity. Not just goals.

The difference is the game had moved on. That's a huge difference. There could have been a goal scored in that time.

The Arc gets things wrongs and slows things down. Review during the goal ad breaks. Back the umpires in re points. This decision wasn't even conclusive - but even if it was right, the game had moved on. Just like any incorrect free / 50 etc.

 

[beside the seaside]

Just wait until a Grand Final is decided by this almost child-like, simpleton, imbecilic idea. I really wonder at times if the AFL at admin levels is actually full of Dunning Kruger sufferers, unaware of just how idiotically stupid they really are.

No one ever seems to be able to project forward with any basic common sense on what possible affects their changes might have on the game in multiple play situations. They only seem to be capable of thinking at the most basic shallow level of how a change might affect one direct specific goal etc. It's as if no-one has the ability to "Game Play" and think deeper regarding flow on ramifications.

Just wait until this balls up of an idea decides a Grand Final. One team kicks 2 goals in that 90 second period to win it. Then the review says "nope"; "90 seconds ago there was a chance at a goal after a mark on the line we missed. Hand the ball over to the other team and give them a shot to win. Oh actually, maybe we'll remove those 2 goals the team scored to win the Grand Final during those 90 seconds as well. Oh lets also pretend that player who did is ACL in those 90 seconds wasn't actually injured as well. Someone call his family and tell them it's ok, it never actually happened!!

Like it's going to be literal riots I think.

What if it helps to correct a poor decision in a grand final?

 

[oak79]

What if it helps to correct a poor decision in a grand final?

And un does other goals?

Do you want every free / 50 reviewed by the Arc? And arc can call missed frees too right?

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

The difference is the game had moved on. That's a huge difference. There could have been a goal scored in that time.

The Arc gets things wrongs and slows things down. Review during the goal ad breaks. Back the umpires in re points. This decision wasn't even conclusive - but even if it was right, the game had moved on. Just like any incorrect free / 50 etc.

So what you're asking for is a rule change. Which is fine. But what they did today was the correct process and decision.

 

[beside the seaside]

And un does other goals?

Do you want every free / 50 reviewed by the Arc? And arc can call missed frees too right?

Makes sense to me to call it back if there's an error on the goal line. It robbed Adelaide of finals.

It's pretty unlikely there'd be a goal but there obviously wouldn't be multiple goals.

Really the goal umpire should have reviewed it.

 

[The_Todd07]

So what you're asking for is a rule change. Which is fine. But what they did today was the correct process and decision.

Also the first time its happened in 2 and a bit seasons since the Adelaide issue.

The issues with today are that the umpires should be told there's a review happening so the game can be held up at the next opportunity. That way only 10-15 seconds needs to be wiped if something is overturned.

The main issue is that it shouldn't have been overturned anyway. With the location of the cameras, you cannot definitively conclude that the ball completely crossed the line because the camera are not inline with the back edge. It's like giving someone out LBW while standing at mid off.

 

[kaiserchief13]

No. That's the whole point. They don't bring it back. They no longer hold up play every time, they instead play on and review it in the background.
They review everything, and only bring the ones back that were incorrect.

Which is exactly what they did today.

Ok then, what's the time limit for this? Because surely there is a time limit? Or is the AFL so unprofessional to a) not announce this being an official rule and b) not having a time limit for it?

 

[kozi]

Arc just found a missed goal to north they’re calling both teams back tomorrow

 

[oak79]

So what you're asking for is a rule change. Which is fine. But what they did today was the correct process and decision.

It wasn't the correct process or decision.

It was inclusive, and how much time are allowed according to your rules? Until the game ends.

The Arc is overused (umpires should back themselves in), and a farcical poorly thought system. Once play resume, arc should be out of the equation - even if the decision was wrong.

 

[oak79]

I don't know how long it was, but that seems to be the only legitimate complaint about what happened today. That the ARC guy just took too long to review it.

Everything else that people are upset about is quite misplaced.

Most people agree it was an inconclusive decision.

But yes the time is the big issue.

 

[kosifantutti]

A number of people have pointed out that the geometry is all wrong for these type of decisions. Yet another reason to scrap the whole system.

 

[Sarcoidevo]

The goal umpire got it wrong ... should have at least asked for review given how tight it was

In the end the correct decision was made as the Saints were awarded a score (point) that should not have stood because the ball was marked before the whole ball crossed the line.

When in doubt go the review .... goal umpire should not have guessed

If Saints had won or lost by a point or the game was a draw it would have been a bigger controversy

Here's looking at the Media for bangin on for goal umpires to be more assertive and take an immediate decision

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Hahaha.

This was an Adelaide official after they missed the finals because of a goal line error...


He said it was "inexplicable" that a score review was not called for, and suggested the league consider rule changes to strengthen video review protocols.

"The whole system needs to be reviewed in the light of the circumstances," he said.

"If a mistake has been made by any umpire then there should be the capacity in the rules for a field umpire to then intervene, even if — even if — the play has moved on."


So this is what Gil introduced. And now we don't like it.

 

[HairyO]

Makes sense to me to call it back if there's an error on the goal line. It robbed Adelaide of finals.

It's pretty unlikely there'd be a goal but there obviously wouldn't be multiple goals.

Really the goal umpire should have reviewed it.

What about an error 25m from the goals?

Why is it just the goal line?

WAY more goals are scored from not the goal line.

And yes the goal umpire ****ed up. We get cranky when they call for a review on the obvious ones but that takes 15 seconds. To not review a close one was just a bad call.

And we seem to be getting more and more bad calls each week. While the AFL does nothing.

 

[TENACIOUS]

North got screwed.

ARC should be used for goals only. Calling the ball back after the umpire has made a decision and play has continued for stupid ‘lasso’ infringements or checking behinds is wrong.

 

[beside the seaside]

What about an error 25m from the goals?

Why is it just the goal line?

WAY more goals are scored from not the goal line.

And yes the goal umpire ****ed up. We get cranky when they call for a review on the obvious ones but that takes 15 seconds. To not review a close one was just a bad call.

And we seem to be getting more and more bad calls each week. While the AFL does nothing.

I don't get what error you'd be talking about 25m from goal. They have reviews for goal line decisions.

They should have got the umpires to stop play while they did the review, seems a simple enough fix. Not sure it needs the levels of outrage that are on display and in this case it had zero impact on the result so the perfect example to work out some teething issues.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I don't get what error you'd be talking about 25m from goal. They have reviews for goal line decisions.

They should have got the umpires to stop play while they did the review, seems a simple enough fix. Not sure it needs the levels of outrage that are on display and in this case it had zero impact on the result so the perfect example to work out some teething issues.

But you do realise they've reviewed every close goal line decision for the last couple of years without stopping play?

They've reviewed it whilst allowing play to continue, and we were none the wiser.

I think that's much better than us having to wait every time.

Review it, then bring it back if it was wrong. Simple as that.


I can't comprehend people (not you by the way) suggesting that even if a decision is wrong, the AFL should just let it go cause it's a bit annoying to bring the ball back??! That's insane.

 

[Kappa]

Saints supporters petitioning the ARC to go back to 09 to correct the Hawkins poster.

Can the arc retcon the last 17 seasons?

 

[SSSSSS]

Can the arc retcon the last 17 seasons?

We're just going to have to replay them all.

 

[oak79]

I can't comprehend people (not you by the way) suggesting that even if a decision is wrong, the AFL should just let it go cause it's a bit annoying to bring the ball back??! That's insane.

How is that insane? What if the free kick that resulted in the goal was wrong? They don't review that.

If play has restarted, the time for a review is past.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

How is that insane? What if the free kick that resulted in the goal was wrong? They don't review that.

If play has restarted, the time for a review is past.

If they could, they should.


But as I said originally, I don't think there should be any technology in sport. Just let the umpires do their job, and stop sooking on footy forums and talk back radio all week when a bad decision doesn't go your way.


But....if they do have technology, then surely people can't be suggesting that they don't use it and don't rectify incorrect decisions that cost teams goals??

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

In the 4th quarter I was expecting music to hit with Fraser Gehrig walking out to the ground and the commentators like “who is he taking the free kick for” only for him to take his shirt off to reveal a St Kilda jumper and vision on the screen showing a mark in the goal square that was called a behind in 1997 just to rub further salt into the wound

In all seriousness though this was done for gambling reasons. You’d have to be insane to think otherwise

 

[The Slitherin' Snake]

A incorrectly called behind can be just as influential as an incorrect goal, just ask Adelaide fans.

An incorrectly called freekick or mark or similar in the goal square can as well. I don't think we want play stopped a minute later and brought back because of it though

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

We're just going to have to replay them all.

Just do away with goal umpires, boundary umpires, and maybe even field umpires. Just have people umpiring the game from the stands from now on.