Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Doesn't matter. He's not playing finals.Hearing McAdam has a broken jaw…
Impact to the head was low, but the chance of the Swans moving deep into the finals is high.It’s because the impact was not serious…Drs would have reviewed over and again on the bench and still chose to do nothing, because impact was low.
Because none of the footage is conclusive.Dunno why any Swans fan is arguing footage was inconclusive. Just take the win and run
Goal and boundary umpires are normally from the local area. So The goal umpire has been stood down for 2 potential games. Not a huge blow in the endReally don't understand the goal umpire being stood down either, what an absolute scapegoat.
Can someone remind me how long the field umpires in the 2016 Grand Final were stood down for after the league admitted the performance was sub par?
Nah the suspension is right I reckonThis suspension is a joke. It shouldn’t have even been a free.
McCartin correctly followed the bounce of the ball while keeping his body low - perfect technique.
The Adelaide player kept running straight and hit McCartin, head first, seeking to drew the free.
By the time the Adelaide player hit McCartin, McCartin already had his back turned to him and was facing the ball. I took screen shots and here is the link if you correctly don’t automatically trust a freeze frame - Link
At the very worst, it is a football incident. If the Adelaide player wasn’t planning on staging and actually hit McCartin with some force, it should have been a free to McCartin for a hit in the back. It’s not McCartin fault that he is not soft as * like the Adelaide player.
We should appeal. The AFL is a farce.
The one behind the goal is very conclusiveBecause none of the footage is conclusive.
Yes, unbelievable. Just how unprofessional does the AFL want to look?Really don't understand the goal umpire being stood down either, what an absolute scapegoat.
Can you post it please? I’ve seen heaps of footage that shows it looks like it was a goal, but I haven’t seen anything that shows the goal umpire (who was in a near-perfect position, let’s not forget) was wrong. That is the issue here.The one behind the goal is very conclusive
Edited for "Crows" accuracy.That shows basically nothing.
PeterSalt definitely lives up to his name.?? Never said I was.
So no definitive footage. Thanks for dropping in.
I agree, I haven't seen anything conclusive enough to overturn the decisionBecause none of the footage is conclusive.
Yes, unbelievable. Just how unprofessional does the AFL want to look?
To be honest, I'm so surprised Gil admitted that it would have been a goal. I was sure they'd come out and say the review would have been inconclusive and the behind would have stayed. That would have protected them from everythingMakes them look amateur hour I agree, very reactive trying to placate the fans with a tokenistic response.
Just another dig at the Swans by the AFL obviously.To be honest, I'm so surprised Gil admitted that it would have been a goal. I was sure they'd come out and say the review would have been inconclusive and the behind would have stayed. That would have protected them from everything
I don't understand why we were handed a 2 year trading ban for no reason.I don't understand why the umpire was stood down,
And it would have been the truth of the situation in the absence of more conclusive footage.To be honest, I'm so surprised Gil admitted that it would have been a goal. I was sure they'd come out and say the review would have been inconclusive and the behind would have stayed. That would have protected them from everything
Yep let's not forget the frame rate of phone footage gives completely inadequate res for such a situation.Yes it is an alternative view, but it's fan footage so therefore wouldn't be used for a score review.
I don't believe it would have been overturned - no matter what Gil said, it would have been umpires call.
IMO the available footage is 100% conclusive. It was a goal.
Can you post an example that shows without a doubt the umpire was wrong?IMO the available footage is 100% conclusive. It was a goal.