"Umpires Call"

Remove this Banner Ad

deck

Premiership Player
Aug 7, 2004
3,364
1,398
Melburn
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Liverpool, SF 49ers, FSU
The speed of the ball as cricket level is triple that of AFL, same with tennis. If they can get the camera's right the AFL has no excuse.
Your trying to compare apples with oranges, Tennis are only looking at line calls. Cricket also has issues with catches that touched the turf being inconclusive and as I already stated close runouts that are occasionally inconclusive.

The fact is TV runs at 50fps and everything moves that quick that your left with blurred footage when zoomed in. Anytime you try to enhance the footage after the fact you will have issues with fast motion. A fixed camera in a spot zoomed in is ideal for the goal line but that doesn't help when the ball is away from that area.
 

deck

Premiership Player
Aug 7, 2004
3,364
1,398
Melburn
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Liverpool, SF 49ers, FSU
I know it isn't but the AFL values eyewitness accounts greater than video evidence.
You have 2 umpires at each end who make the decisions for the entire game. Now you want the video reviewer to overturn the umpires decision because he thinks it wasn't touched but isn't entirely convinced it wasn't?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

benji21

All Australian
Apr 2, 2016
832
514
Hong Kong
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other problem you get is defenders yelling i touched it i swear while the umpires trying to decide whether to go up to get it checked. Does that then play on his decision considering he thinks that the score review will fix it anyways?
 

backtozero

Club Legend
Jul 26, 2020
2,611
5,600
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
You have 2 umpires at each end who make the decisions for the entire game. Now you want the video reviewer to overturn the umpires decision because he thinks it wasn't touched but isn't entirely convinced it wasn't?
When the umpire isn't sure and asks for help, yes I want them to overturn the decision. Otherwise there is absolutely zero point to video reviews.
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
58,020
62,688
AFL Club
West Coast
Umpire's call is fine. That's what happens in every other competition in the country.

The silliest thing about the whole process is if a defender says "I did NOT touch it" they still review to see if it was touched.
 

Lavender Bushranger

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 25, 2005
6,878
10,585
Grogansville
AFL Club
Gold Coast
LOL so you didn't agree with the call so it needs to be looked at?

You do realise if there was no such thing as a score review this umpire would have called it touch and a point anyway right?



On SM-G980F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Good point.

He actually asked for it be checked to see if Vlaustin touched it over the line! FFS. It was about a metre before the line!

So this squarely is the umpire's fault this one. The poor guy just sh*t the bed.

However having said that, the score review system should actually be there to address this precise scenario. The umpire CLEARLY did not have a clue. So the 4th umpire should have been given 100% authority to make a decision.

It's different if the umpire is sure and someone is disputing it - then you should have to have conclusive evidence he/she was wrong. But if they're guessing, WTF must it be conclusive?

It's like being guilty until proven innocent.

Ludicrous system.
 

Kappa

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 7, 2014
20,822
25,686
AFL Club
Collingwood
I'm not sure how the morons who implemented this system didn't just see endless controversy from the get go. If a ball moves 50cm between frames it was never going to give the results it was intended to.
Just like in cricket, it was brought in to remove the howlers were the umpire makes an obvious mistake. Making decisions on tough 50/50 calls was never the point and, rightfully, just goes back to umpires call anyway.
 

hcd199

Club Legend
Apr 29, 2009
2,156
1,448
Hobart
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Waterford GAA, Glenorchy, Hob (BBL)
When the evidence is inconclusive that it hit the post, then it should be a goal. If the evidence that it was touched is inconclusive, then it should be a goal.

Please scrap this passing the buck nonsense.
This isn't what the rule was even before video review came in. If the goal umpire wasn't sure whether it had hit the post or was touched, they'd convene with the field and boundary umpires to see if they could help; unless they were sure it was a goal, they would "pay the lesser", so touched behind/hit the post in these examples. And rightfully so - why should teams be gifted dubious goals?

There are problems with the video review as things stand, but reverting to the umpire's call when video evidence is inconclusive to overturn is an entirely sensible policy.
 

Lavender Bushranger

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 25, 2005
6,878
10,585
Grogansville
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Just like in cricket, it was brought in to remove the howlers were the umpire makes an obvious mistake. Making decisions on tough 50/50 calls was never the point and, rightfully, just goes back to umpires call anyway.
The issue is when the umpire actually doesn't have a clue. It happens quite a bit.

In those scenarios, just say so. Then let the 4th umpire decide.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Shadow89

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 20, 2018
6,465
14,615
AFL Club
Geelong
I love that no-one is pointing out the real villain here - Vlastuin. He dropped his head, and then changed his mind and acted like it was touched. Most players are pretty honourable and admit one way or another. His farcical act after his original natural reaction of realizing he hadn't touched it, is just another strike against his name as a fair footballer (he's had a few this year)
 

Tasmanian saint

Club Legend
Apr 24, 2018
1,466
945
AFL Club
St Kilda
Just like in cricket, it was brought in to remove the howlers were the umpire makes an obvious mistake. Making decisions on tough 50/50 calls was never the point and, rightfully, just goes back to umpires call anyway.
That’s the thing it wasn’t a 50/50 call you could see it wasn’t touched
 

BF Tiger

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 5, 2007
7,393
17,175
9th
AFL Club
Richmond
I love that no-one is pointing out the real villain here - Vlastuin. He dropped his head, and then changed his mind and acted like it was touched. Most players are pretty honourable and admit one way or another. His farcical act after his original natural reaction of realizing he hadn't touched it, is just another strike against his name as a fair footballer (he's had a few this year)
Yeah, he’s an evil mastermind. Has actually stated he touched it on on social media today and called out a journo calling him a cheat. Given the quality of the footage you could argue either way - Vlastuin could easily have had a fingernail to the ball without deflecting it in any way that would not be seen on the replays. Umpire called it touched, Vlastuin said it was touched at the time... good chance it was touched.
 

Power Raid

TheBrownDog
Oct 15, 2004
69,129
59,011
West Perth
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The current system makes sense. Umpire makes the call, then a review. If a review provides conclusive evidence, the decision is made.

The issue is poor technology systems, too many reviews and reviews should not be telecast........rather play goes on with the umpires call and only recalled if overturned.
 

Chuckie357

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 9, 2015
8,494
6,744
AFL Club
St Kilda
LOL so you didn't agree with the call so it needs to be looked at?

You do realise if there was no such thing as a score review this umpire would have called it touch and a point anyway right?



On SM-G980F using BigFooty.com mobile app
no he wouldn’t have. Otherwise he would’ve hit his hand above his head straight away, instead he waited for the ball to be actually rushed though to say anything because he realized he had a howler
 

Philth

Club Legend
Feb 4, 2008
1,318
1,567
Geraldton
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Leeds United
Umpire's call is fine. That's what happens in every other competition in the country.

The silliest thing about the whole process is if a defender says "I did NOT touch it" they still review to see if it was touched.
Do defenders actually do that?
I have wondered about the honesty/integrity of players who claim touched.
Vlastuin is a highly respected player at the Tigers and potential future captain.
This score was not at a crucial time and I believe his call.
 

Rusty Brookes

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 9, 2001
5,445
6,003
Preston
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Manningham Cobras
This isn't what the rule was even before video review came in. If the goal umpire wasn't sure whether it had hit the post or was touched, they'd convene with the field and boundary umpires to see if they could help; unless they were sure it was a goal, they would "pay the lesser", so touched behind/hit the post in these examples. And rightfully so - why should teams be gifted dubious goals?

There are problems with the video review as things stand, but reverting to the umpire's call when video evidence is inconclusive to overturn is an entirely sensible policy.
See I disagree.

You pay what you can confirm. So in the game last night, the ball had gone through the goals, it didn't hit the post - that's a goal. The goal umpire wasn't sure whether it was touched and neither was the score review. A behind was paid on an assumption that something might have happened - not on confirmation that it did.

The Dangerfield one tonight actually highlights the point. The umpire should have called a goal (what he did know was the ball went through) but can he get confirmation that the ball didn't hit the post. The review indicated that there's no evidence the ball touched the post. So the goal was correctly paid. But if the evidence was inconclusive, it would have been paid a behind.
 

Wazza69

Debutant
May 6, 2020
113
265
AFL Club
Richmond
I’m thinkin the umpire calls what he believes he saw and then gets the review and pretty much says “I believe it was touched,unless you’ve got conclusive evidence that it wasn’t touched then my call is touched”


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Spearman

Club Legend
Sep 15, 2017
2,072
3,132
expatriated in East Asia
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Ohio State Buckeyes
So do that then. Why are we using technology that they don't want to rely on?
As I said in my first post, you have to live by that.
If you're not going to go by the footage that you have then don't do a review at all.
Passing the decision back to the guy that asked for the review to begin with is completely pointless.
Because they're not, really. Some cheer squad kid with his iphone could do it.
 

Spearman

Club Legend
Sep 15, 2017
2,072
3,132
expatriated in East Asia
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Ohio State Buckeyes
I’m thinkin the umpire calls what he believes he saw and then gets the review and pretty much says “I believe it was touched,unless you’ve got conclusive evidence that it wasn’t touched then my call is touched”


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I believe that is how it is supposed to work. :)

Until there is absolute state of the art tech used, you have to back the goal ump, and he/she have to have that confidence in themselves.
 

Remove this Banner Ad