Roast The Non Goal: F*** the AFL, court injunction?

[SugarShane]

Well, the AFL is making changes for the finals, including a senior official in the score review system to have real time discussions with the umpires.

Also, the umpires have now been told to intervene if they feel the goal umpire has made a mistake. Unbelievable! Do they mean to say that they have been unable to do this obvious thing until now? I really find it difficult to believe that a senior umpire would be too scared to have intervened until being told to, yet even in the more obvious case of the Cameron out-of-bounds receive, they failed to.

It's not being scared, it's having officially defined roles. A boundary umpire can't call free kicks. A field umpire can't call out of bounds. Presumably these things are in place to save face and avoid potentially embarrassing cases of 2 umpires disagreeing on something. Except something far more embarrassing has forced their hand.

In case 1 though, does that even fix the weekend's issue? The issue was the goal ump immediately calling the score. Apart from the "mistaken" celebration, which happens plenty, there wasn't much else to say the ump was wrong until a minute or more later. Seems like a token, pointless gesture unless they have the power to call play back. Unless they're going to review 5 angles within 5 seconds of it occurring and before play resumes.

 

[Crow till I die]

Penbo dropped it this morning that there is a planned board meeting tonight, and Rowe also said that he couldnt wait to read the press release tomorrow from the club.

any word from said meeting being reported?

 

[texanmike]

any word from said meeting being reported?

didn’t listen to the whole show this morning only doedee interview, so I wouldn’t know sorry.

 

[robboaustralia]

Every goal we kick we should shake the hand of the goal ump for getting it right.

Rankine with a score review signal goal celebtation folllwed by a stick it up em fist up under arm signal

 

[robboaustralia]

Every goal we kick we should shake the hand of the goal ump for getting it right.

Or stand next to him and signal the goal ourselves or a polite slow handclap

 

[cmndstab]

Wonder if we have anything planned for if Keays kicks a goal. Last thing we want out of this is for Keays to do a smartarse celebration then get fined.

I kinda want this actually

 

[Crow till I die]

I kinda want this actually

he runs to the middle of the goal after he kicks the goal...looks up, nods and then signals a goal next to the goal umpire

 

[Crows I Am]

Well, the AFL is making changes for the finals, including a senior official in the score review system to have real time discussions with the umpires.

Also, the umpires have now been told to intervene if they feel the goal umpire has made a mistake. Unbelievable! Do they mean to say that they have been unable to do this obvious thing until now? I really find it difficult to believe that a senior umpire would be too scared to have intervened until being told to, yet even in the more obvious case of the Cameron out-of-bounds receive, they failed to.

Common sense, crazy that the field umpires couldn't intervene already if they thought there was an incorrect decision. They wouldn't need to over rule the goal umpire, just direct them to go to the review to confirm their original decision was the correct one.

 

[FR0GGY]

Exclusive!
Here’s our banner

 

[woofsson]

I kinda want this actually

Next time we kick a goal we all set up for a point kick in......

 

[woofsson]

I have heard so many commentators say that on form and standard of play (2nd highest scoring team, 5th highest percentage etc.) AFC should be playing finals that I would really like us to smash WCE by >200 points and set new records for a team that didn't play in the finals.

 

[Geoffa32]

he runs to the middle of the goal after he kicks the goal...looks up, nods and then signals a goal next to the goal umpire

With Stevie Wonder sunglasses on......

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Geoffa32]

What happens next year when Daniel Hoskin umpires our games.


Are we allowed to boo him?

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[George Kramer]

didn’t listen to the whole show this morning only doedee interview, so I wouldn’t know sorry.

What did the dude say?

 

[jenny61_99]

What happens next year when Daniel Hoskin umpires our games.


Are we allowed to boo him?

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

They would be absolutely STUPID to have him umpire another game for us! The booing would be of epic proportions.

 

[texanmike]

What did the dude say?

Alot of fluff, just about last weeks game and whether he is looking to stay at Adelaide or not, club and himself have not agreed to terms just yet but he says he wants to be a crow for life, but they all say that so who knows.

 

[jenny61_99]

Alot of fluff, just about last weeks game and whether he is looking to stay at Adelaide or not, club and himself have not agreed to terms just yet but he says he wants to be a crow for life, but they all say that so who knows.

I think his problem is he took a gamble by not accepting the initial contract offer, hoping to up his value. Now, with the knee, our offer probably looks significantly different. Can he get more from a VIC Club? I have no doubt he'd prefer to stay... but think he'll only do so if he doesn't get a better offer.

 

[jackster83]

What happens next year when Daniel Hoskin umpires our games.


Are we allowed to boo him?

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

His umpiring days are over.

 

[arrowman]

Well, the AFL is making changes for the finals, including a senior official in the score review system to have real time discussions with the umpires.

Also, the umpires have now been told to intervene if they feel the goal umpire has made a mistake. Unbelievable! Do they mean to say that they have been unable to do this obvious thing until now? I really find it difficult to believe that a senior umpire would be too scared to have intervened until being told to, yet even in the more obvious case of the Cameron out-of-bounds receive, they failed to.

This is what I really want to know - what exactly is changing? Did the umpires have the authority to intervene, and if they did, what sort of guidelines were they given? Or are we now changing the rules / guidelines to say "from now on..."?

Because let's be honest, when the goal umpire is 100% sure, signals a behind immediately, what grounds does the field umpire have to call for a review? "All the players were celebrating" doesn't really cut it.

I mean, we all know the field umpire (or ARC) should have called for a review, but to be fair it was a bit of a black swan event for the umpires.

I think the "senior official in the score review system" is better. I mean, have both, but the score review people is the important one IMO.

Because

It's not being scared, it's having officially defined roles. A boundary umpire can't call free kicks. A field umpire can't call out of bounds. Presumably these things are in place to save face and avoid potentially embarrassing cases of 2 umpires disagreeing on something. Except something far more embarrassing has forced their hand.

Again, I'd like clarity on this. The field umpire(s) is/are the highest authority on the field? Do they have that authority? Or are we now giving them an authority they didn't have before? Or, indeed, are we giving a new authority (or new guidelines on an existing authority) to the ARC people?

Unless they're going to review 5 angles within 5 seconds of it occurring and before play resumes.

They don't have to do a full review, just enough to see that there might be some doubt.

 

[AJB84]

This is what I really want to know - what exactly is changing? Did the umpires have the authority to intervene, and if they did, what sort of guidelines were they given? Or are we now changing the rules / guidelines to say "from now on..."?

Because let's be honest, when the goal umpire is 100% sure, signals a behind immediately, what grounds does the field umpire have to call for a review? "All the players were celebrating" doesn't really cut it.

I mean, we all know the field umpire (or ARC) should have called for a review, but to be fair it was a bit of a black swan event for the umpires.

I think the "senior official in the score review system" is better. I mean, have both, but the score review people is the important one IMO.

Because

Again, I'd like clarity on this. The field umpire(s) is/are the highest authority on the field? Do they have that authority? Or are we now giving them an authority they didn't have before? Or, indeed, are we giving a new authority (or new guidelines on an exiting authority) to the ARC people?

They don't have to do a full review, just enough to see that there might be some doubt.

This is part of the reason I would like us to have taken it to court.

You would have all the umpires up on the stand providing information under oath and could figure out what each of them saw and what they were thinking.

The AFL has gone to ground and refused to provide any details as to why this happened. They are now providing solutions by pulling them out of the ass with no reasoning as to why this will help.

 

[Geoffa32]

His umpiring days are over.

You would think so.

Wait and see I guess.





On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Maddogmetro]

Tremendous

Demonstrating your complete lack of understanding again, Sanders. The people liking your comments are the usual suspects as well. Care to weigh in, with completely unearned confidence, on another topic you have no clue about? I have seen you pretend to understand legal issues a few times and be hilariously wrong.

 

[Maddogmetro]

There you go again Sanders, using anecdotal evidence about Greg Louganis‘ career.

Do you have any peer-reviewed Olympic studies that show Louganis displayed self control, or is that just your own inherent bias?

Stop pretending to be a practicing diving coach.

Well, Slippery, I didn't put it past you to bring your issues an another board to this thread. And here you go.

Interesting you continue to wear your refusal to understand logic and statistics as a badge of honour.

 

[Betts are off]

His umpiring days are over.

Agreed. Its not a hard gig, but clearly he's not up to it!

Stick to your weekday job dude. There's less chance you'll derail 4 professional sports team's and excess of 200 players and coaches quest for a premiership with your incompetence.

 

[BRL121]

This is what I really want to know - what exactly is changing? Did the umpires have the authority to intervene, and if they did, what sort of guidelines were they given? Or are we now changing the rules / guidelines to say "from now on..."?

Because let's be honest, when the goal umpire is 100% sure, signals a behind immediately, what grounds does the field umpire have to call for a review? "All the players were celebrating" doesn't really cut it.

I mean, we all know the field umpire (or ARC) should have called for a review, but to be fair it was a bit of a black swan event for the umpires.

I think the "senior official in the score review system" is better. I mean, have both, but the score review people is the important one IMO.

Because

Again, I'd like clarity on this. The field umpire(s) is/are the highest authority on the field? Do they have that authority? Or are we now giving them an authority they didn't have before? Or, indeed, are we giving a new authority (or new guidelines on an exiting authority) to the ARC people?

They don't have to do a full review, just enough to see that there might be some doubt.

Good question. As I implied in my original post, I strongly suspect that the umpires had been instructed not to intervene in goal/boundary decisions. Clearly, they would have had some sort of imprimatur given that they control the game.

The clincher for me is the Geelong game where Cameron received the handball 2m out of bounds and kicked the goal. He was in the perfect view of at least one boundary ump and three field umps, so there was absolutely no doubt involved. Yet, noone did anything.
Either none of them knew the rules of the game, or they were obeying instructions not to interfere. I think the latter, going by today's announcement. The head ump should have had a discussion with the boundary ump on that occasion.