Goal review v Hawks q time

[Chris who]

Did anyone else see it as a bit of a mess. The goal umpire has the call on this one And I think he wanted to call it play on but he wanted it reviewed. The only way to call for a review in that situation would be to call it a goal and have it reviewed.
Did the goal umpire gift the “umpires call” to hawthorn so they could get a review? If so that’s wrong IMO

 

[oak79]

Did anyone else see it as a bit of a mess. The goal umpire has the call on this one And I think he wanted to call it play on but he wanted it reviewed. The only way to call for a review in that situation would be to call it a goal and have it reviewed.
Did the goal umpire gift the “umpires call” to hawthorn so they could get a review? If so that’s wrong IMO

Goal umpire said he's not allowed to review if it goes back into play. He wanted to review but couldn't.

Field umpire asked him to mate a decision and then review it. I didnt have an issue with it, correct decision was made.

 

[Dazzler9]

Goal umpire said he's not allowed to review if it goes back into play. He wanted to review but couldn't.

Field umpire asked him to mate a decision and then review it. I didnt have an issue with it, correct decision was made.

It was the right outcome but the manner in which we got there could have been costly, and we absolutely should have an issue with it.

The goal umpire didn't think it crossed the line but wasn't sure.
He wasn't allowed to review it in that circumstance, so the field umpire effectively forced him to call a goal as the "soft decision" in order to allow a review.
If the goal line camera angle had been inconclusive, then a goal would have stood, given that was the goal umpire's soft decision. Even though he thought it wasn't a goal.

 

[Chris who]

It was the right outcome but the manner in which we got there could have been costly, and we absolutely should have an issue with it.

The goal umpire didn't think it crossed the line but wasn't sure.
He wasn't allowed to review it in that circumstance, so the field umpire effectively forced him to call a goal as the "soft decision" in order to allow a review.
If the goal line camera angle had been inconclusive, then a goal would have stood, given that was the goal umpire's soft decision. Even though he thought it wasn't a goal.

Exactly my point. Think it’s a big deal and should be fixed. Step one would be to allow a goal/no score review after the siren. Step 2 is the more difficult one if letting play go on while they review. They seem to be able to do it in a league. Is it an option in the afl though ?

 

[Dazzler9]

Exactly my point. Think it’s a big deal and should be fixed. Step one would be to allow a goal/no score review after the siren. Step 2 is the more difficult one if letting play go on while they review. They seem to be able to do it in a league. Is it an option in the afl though ?

Just need to review those ones at the next stoppage I guess.

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

2 reviews in the game and 2 correct decisions.

 

[Dazzler9]

2 reviews in the game and 2 correct decisions.

Yep, they both were correct.

The goal line one could've been costly, for the reasons stated above.

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

Yep, they both were correct.

The goal line one could've been costly, for the reasons stated above.

It was the only way to review it in the situation . What would have happened if it wasnt the end of a quarter ? It should have been play on . Probably a.bounce at the top of the square

 

[Ochre]

2 reviews in the game and 2 correct decisions.

Yeah but the same yesterday didn't stop Hardwick whining

 

[Dazzler9]

It was the only way to review it in the situation . What would have happened if it wasnt the end of a quarter ? It should have been play on . Probably a.bounce at the top of the square

Yes I get that, and that is the problem.
So even though the goal ump thought it didn't cross the line, if the video review was inconclusive it would have stood as a goal. Even though nobody thought it was a goal. Kerrrazy

 

[Truckosaurus]

Agreed. Bloody stupid that "I don't think it was a score" can't trigger a review. That said, I think the way it was handled, making a soft call, was the best choice on the spot.

Having said that, the soft call should have been 'touched' because the goal ump really didn't think it was any score but whatever score he picked would have stood if it was inconclusive (or the operator was as stupid as most of them seem to be). Lessen the harm/closer to his actual decision.

 

[ioppolo]

The goal ump seemed to be shitting himself. The pressuring from the onfield ump wasn't helping, but it really was amateur hour

 

[JohnW]

Surely he should just be able to call play on? They review it, if he was wrong the just add the score on?

 

[Dazzler9]

Surely he should just be able to call play on? They review it, if he was wrong the just add the score on?

Seriously?

 

[Dazzler9]

Surely he should just be able to call play on? They review it, if he was wrong the just add the score on?

They can do that with after the siren kicks, but not during general play.

 

[JohnW]

They can do that with after the siren kicks, but not during general play.

Why not? If they are not convinced it's crossed the line and it's been punched back in, why can't they back that in and let play continue? There is no need for them to have to make a call

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Dazzler9]

Why not? If they are not convinced it's crossed the line and it's been punched back in, why can't they back that in and let play continue? There is no need for them to have to make a call

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

You can't just then add the score on if they review it later though.

 

[Wadsworth]

The solution would seem to be an "Umpires Call" option for reviews. The umpire can call for a review without having to state his opinion and if it is inconclusive then he makes his judgement. Then any inconclusive footage at least goes back to the best judgement available rather than the default needing to go back to it being a goal.

 

[JohnW]

You can't just then add the score on if they review it later though.

I wouldn't be concerned if they did, similar to the NBA where they change 2 pointers to 3 pointers etc. Perhaps they have an under 3 minutes left rule where the goal umpire can call for a review which stops play. Over 3 minutes left play just continues and the score will be correct within 30 seconds.

 

[Chris who]

yeah nah
Goals go back to the centre for a bounce, points get a kick in
No chance