Review Round 10, 2020 vs Western Bulldogs

Remove this Banner Ad

El_Scorcho

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2007
26,735
66,887
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
None of the cameras are good enough to see precisely is what the ball is doing when the snicko spike happens. This isn't like cricket where there are 8 high quality cameras zoomed in on the batsman, and is used in conjunction with hot spot and slow-mo.

Even with all of that, they need conclusive evidence to overturn an umpire's call, and there are iffy ones all the time.

How we can overturn the call of an umpire who was 2 feet away from any potential impact with footage that is so far away it's nowhere near fit for purpose, with no clear angle on the ball. I mean fmd. Imagine how quickly India would mobilise the nukes if Kohli was given out on that evidence.
 

TeeKray

Moderator
Mar 1, 2014
12,193
64,189
Perth
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I'm happy with the outcome of the review. On the balance of probabilities an audio spike aligning with the ball passing the post so closely that you can't see daylight is conclusive enough for me to conclude it's a behind. The right call was made.
The daylight thing is utter bullshit. It's a two dimensional image, it's impossible to tell whether it hit the post or not without seeing a clear deviation of the ball.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It Just Is

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 25, 2012
7,364
13,319
On cloud 9
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Can suck it!
I’m yet to be convinced the AFL actually have snicko technology.

I’ve seen it used maybe half a dozen times over the last 2 years, seemingly at random with regard to venues/incidents. Plus, you are telling me that it can pick up the slightest noise on a post 20m high with a heap of padding around it when an umpire less than an erection away can’t? And these same people can’t get a camera within 100m of said post.

I remember seeing one review where it looked like the ball took a big chunk of post and then they wheeled out a snicko snake so flat it was surely dead.

I don’t believe your science.
 

It Just Is

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 25, 2012
7,364
13,319
On cloud 9
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Can suck it!
Then there was the goal review were there looked to be ‘daylight’ between ball and post but snicko was going ballistic. Reviewer calls a point and the TV camera zooms out for a full replay. Low and behold old mate Paddy Dangerfield has simultaneous run into the other post and is working it like a stripper.
 

Skindy

Senior List
Sep 18, 2016
174
394
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Batsmen are given out based purely off snicko evidence all the time in cricket where there is no clear deviation of the ball off the bat.

At the end of the day the technology is in place and showed a spike at the moment the ball was adjacent with the post, there was nothing else in contact with the post, and there was no spike prior or after the ball was past the post. I'm not sure what more convincing you need, I'd be livid if it had happened to the bulldogs and not been overturned.
 

Sleezy

Club Legend
Mar 17, 2015
1,988
3,922
Melbourne
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Batsmen are given out based purely off snicko evidence all the time in cricket where there is no clear deviation of the ball off the bat.

At the end of the day the technology is in place and showed a spike at the moment the ball was adjacent with the post, there was nothing else in contact with the post, and there was no spike prior or after the ball was past the post. I'm not sure what more convincing you need, I'd be livid if it had happened to the bulldogs and not been overturned.
And in cricket, there is one player, one bat, ball in the vicinity. No umpire, no crowd, no other players. Actual HD slow motion camera angles. A clear distinction between a hard leather ball hitting willow and that same ball hitting pad.

But it can still be tripped up by: bat hitting pitch, spikes scratching on pitch, the old creaking bat handle. It works well because cricket is isolated and sedate, there is no chaos. You know where the ball is coming from, where it will be bowled and where the batsman will meet it with bat.

AFL is all chaos. There could be 8 other people within a meter or two of a 20 meter post, which has padding, flags hanging off it. There is another post 7 meters away, which also has people around it. Does t have a mike too? Is the mike in the padding or above the padding? Will the ball be coming from the left pocket or the right pocket? bouncing along the ground or 20m in the air? Spiraling, spinning nicely, or helicoptering? Straight through or dropping down from a high snap? There are just too many variables.
 
Last edited:

Stryke

Club Legend
Aug 13, 2013
1,474
4,425
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
And in cricket, there is one player, one bat, ball in the vicinity. No umpire, no crowd, no other players. Actual HD slow motion camera angles. A clear distinction between a hard leather ball hitting willow and that same ball hitting pad.

But it can still be tripped up by: bat hitting pitch, spikes scratching on pitch, the old creaking bat handle. It works well because cricket is isolated and sedate, there is no chaos. You know where the ball is coming from, where it will be bowled and where the batsman will meet it with bat.

AFL is all chaos. There could be 8 other people within a meter or two of a 20 meter post, which has padding, flags hanging off it. There is another post 7 meters away, which also has people around it. Does t have a mike too? Is the mike in the padding or above the padding? Will the ball be coming from the left pocket or the right pocket? bouncing along the ground or 20m in the air? Spiraling, spinning nicely, or helicoptering? Straight through or dropping down from a high snap? There are just too many variables.
100% this. There was no way the umpire could tell from the footage if the ball nicked the post. Generally in cricket there is at least two clear indications of a snick - noise, hotspot, deviation, change of ball rotation....

So sure, the noise might have been the ball. In all fairness it probably was. But was it conclusive?

That should have been umpires call IMO.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Zifa

Club Legend
Apr 9, 2017
1,869
2,116
AFL Club
Port Adelaide

Jonts

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 7, 2009
15,843
18,004
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Flagstaff Hill FC, Tottenham
Bulldogs resting Bont in the 3rd quarter cost them the game. We absolutely destroyed them.
I don't think it was resting but due to the fact we were playing 6 v 6 in their forward line that they tried to get a good match up for Bont up forward rather than a genuine rest
 

Brian McGee

All Australian
Jan 20, 2015
701
1,504
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Because you asked in good faith I will reply in kind. (Although I recognise I might cop some more flack from others by doing so.)

Trying to highlight individual decisions would end up being too long winded and be subjective anyway, so I will use some more general stats to briefly explain my view of last night's umpiring.

The 17 to 14 free kick count may not seem lopsided if you expected such a count should be approximately even. However, the Bulldogs are probably the smallest, least physical team in the league and as a result tend to play annoyingly within the rules. It's not that we are great and fair blokes (although we generally are ;)), but because it's highly unlikely we will benefit from engaging in the extra physical stuff.

Last night Port were understandably the more physically aggressive team and were seemingly happy to run an increased risk of infringing to make sure the Dogs players 'earned' every possession. Which is all fine, but if you play that way you would also reasonably expect to end up behind in the free kick count, not in front.

I think the new roulette wheel style holding the ball interpretations in particular hurt the Dogs a lot more that Port than last night. Port apparently received 7 HTB Frees from 74 tackles, and the Bulldogs received just 1 from 64 tackles. That's a large differential in frees for a small difference in tackles.

In a reasonably close and competitive game, a few key decisions either way can easily impact the result.

Anyway, congrats on the victory and good luck for the rest of the season.
Thanks mate. I tend to think that our aggressive tackling is what resulted in the majority of free kicks either way for both teams. Being winning holding the ball to us or copping your boys too high. I think the high contact frees were more like 7 to you, 1 to us.
But it also shows me how each team views the standard of umpiring as generally against them, as if you asked most on this board they would say that we were potentially hard done by on a few. Maybe it’s just the ones we remember. I certainly don’t think it can be referred to as the mother of al rides to us.
 

Proffessor

All Australian
Jan 21, 2013
935
941
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Thanks mate. I tend to think that our aggressive tackling is what resulted in the majority of free kicks either way for both teams. Being winning holding the ball to us or copping your boys too high. I think the high contact frees were more like 7 to you, 1 to us.
But it also shows me how each team views the standard of umpiring as generally against them, as if you asked most on this board they would say that we were potentially hard done by on a few. Maybe it’s just the ones we remember. I certainly don’t think it can be referred to as the mother of al rides to us.
Everyone has a little bias, some worse than others.

The problem that fans of teams like yours have that can screw a little more with their perception is that you have such a massive crowd bias for your home games (apart from Showdowns). This influences both the umpires in these games and the perceptions your fans develop by watching so many of them in your own special single team echo chamber.

Anyone who thinks Port didn't get the better end of the deal from the umpires in Monday evening's match, is kidding themselves.
Those that think Port were hard done by have serious issues.
 

OneGreatClub

Hall of Famer
Nov 6, 2014
42,259
49,201
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Everyone has a little bias, some worse than others.

The problem that fans of teams like yours have that can screw a little more with their perception is that you have such a massive crowd bias for your home games (apart from Showdowns). This influences both the umpires in these games and the perceptions your fans develop by watching so many of them in your own special single team echo chamber.

Anyone who thinks Port didn't get the better end of the deal from the umpires in Monday evening's match, is kidding themselves.
Those that think Port were hard done by have serious issues.
Rucci said to Ken at half time that the umps weren’t doing Port any favours ( the favours were all yours, the Western Ducks )
 
Apr 14, 2015
32
124
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Everyone has a little bias, some worse than others.

The problem that fans of teams like yours have that can screw a little more with their perception is that you have such a massive crowd bias for your home games (apart from Showdowns). This influences both the umpires in these games and the perceptions your fans develop by watching so many of them in your own special single team echo chamber.

Anyone who thinks Port didn't get the better end of the deal from the umpires in Monday evening's match, is kidding themselves.
Those that think Port were hard done by have serious issues.
Any bulldogs supporter that can’t at least concede their side put on a characteristically pathetic display of ducking and seeking out head high contact is kidding themselves.

I would be genuinely embarrassed if Port played such a lame style of “first instinct is to look for a free” football.
 

Powerade 08

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 10, 2008
11,706
10,708
adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Everyone has a little bias, some worse than others.

The problem that fans of teams like yours have that can screw a little more with their perception is that you have such a massive crowd bias for your home games (apart from Showdowns). This influences both the umpires in these games and the perceptions your fans develop by watching so many of them in your own special single team echo chamber.

Anyone who thinks Port didn't get the better end of the deal from the umpires in Monday evening's match, is kidding themselves.
Those that think Port were hard done by have serious issues.
Spot on mate. I take an objective view with this sort of stuff as there were many throws and ducks that the Port players got away with. The Bulldogs are one of the fairest, some would say the fairest team and the umpires put them at risk every week - mentally and physically - by allowing head high tackles.

Pretty disgusting really. And if it’s true that the SANFL provided the umpires, the Bulldogs should have refused to take the field for this Port Adelaide love-in.
 

Top Bottom