Opinion Non-Crows AFL 5: Save Ken

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Why does there need to be a soft call on field? Football and cricket

If you're not sure and are just making a best guess why can't the 'soft call' be unsure? All power to the video reviewer with a default process for if the video is also inconclusive

 

[Samcro24]

I don’t know who’s right or wrong on this, but if that wasn’t deliberate last night, then you might as well turf the rule, because it isn’t fit for purpose.

That was as deliberate as any rushed behind in the game’s history. But I can understand why the umpire didn’t pay it — nobody wants that to decide a game.

It’s a stupid rule. Get rid of it. For 110 years you were able to rush a behind, and the game did just fine.

My favourite quirk in footy.

Your team rushes- bravo great defensive play.

Opposition rushes - booo, soft!

 

[fuic08]

Whether it was actually a goal or not, that referral last night was just amateur hour, embarrassing stuff for this sport.

There is no f*cking way on God‘s green earth that video umpire could’ve known if that was a goal or point.

I cannot believe he handed down a definitive decision on that.

Whether it ended up being the right decision or not is irrelevant to the point — it is a serious concern that the video umpire thought he could do that.

What the hell was he on? Was he drunk?

The point has been made a fair bit over bigfooty the last 24 hours. But when they were doing the review, they only played a sit second of footage to review. So clearly they were checking to see if all 3 camera angles showed the ball over the post, which they did. So it can't be anywhere else, but directly over the post.

 

[Entitled01]

That works by thermal sensors, and unless we put a hot pack in the ball, it's not going to work like that.

That said, with $2.5b from the last TV rights, you would think it would be easy enough to get the technology in place...If soccer, tennis, NRL and cricket can do it....

Nah. What you need is an annular laser at the top of each goalpost. If the ball goes over the post, then there will be a bright reflection.

Yes.
Would look quite spectacular at night too .

There has to be alternatives to stationary cameras. Even a couple of drones could work

 

[Entitled01]

yeah, its all good isnt it.. until its the crows on the recieving end of a decision like that.

the goal umpire said he ”believed it was a goal”..

the field umpire then referred it saying “the goal umpire has called it a goal, can we please check it”.

now if the people reviewing it had exactly the same vision we all had.. then there is absolutely no way they could determine with 100% certaintly that it was or wasnt a goal and thus couldn't overrule it..

so it should have been sent back down as “umpires call”..

us Crows supporters, still salty from the GF2017 at the hands of Richmond, can laugh about it all we like but we should at the same time be very pissed off with the complete joke this decision is..

as next time it might be our club being kicked out of the finals as a result of this AFL incompetence.

I would venture to say it’s more like karma bus even steven type thing.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I don't have perfect eyesight, but imo that would have touched the post if higher.

Hardwick's whinging in the presser is a sore loser.

Did we complain when Betts was tackled without the ball in the goal square...

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Lynch's complete non-reaction gives it away imo.

Exactly & he had the best view!

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Or maybe whately isn’t as smart as he thinks he is

I used to like Whately when based at the ABC, but he has generally gone to shit since going commercial.

I rarely listen to him anymore.

 

[adelaidecrows]

If a goal umpire says they believe it's something, and it comes back that they were wrong, they get an automatic bad mark in their assessments from the coaches.
They aren't guessing. If they were, their season's ****ed if they get it wrong.

He did get it wrong. Because he guessed and he looks like an arse.

 

[adelaidecrows]

I used to like Whately when based at the ABC, but he has generally gone to s**t since going commercial.

I rarely listen to him anymore.

The problem with the AFL footy shows is there are too many of them and they are on too often. So its no surprise they've ampted up the flog factor for ratings. You only had to watch the trainwreck Eddie interview to understand they completely used his book to fill an anti Adelaide agenda rather than try and talk about what a legend of a career he had. But all interviews would have done the same, why? because of wow factor and wanting ratings.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The goal review wasn't brought in to fix all errors

It was so that decisions the existing cameras show to be wrong can be corrected

The mystery ones can stay mysteries is the AFL's attitude

Just like the Cricket, surely the game is better off with the shocking decisions being overruled.

It just becomes controversial when it's a line ball decision.

Overall we are better off, despite what sulking Hardwick thinks.

 

[fuic08]

Just like the Cricket, surely the game is better off with the shocking decisions being overruled.

It just becomes controversial when it's a line ball decision.

Overall we are better off, despite what sulking Hardwick thinks.

If it comes down to it, a review system is always better. As it eliminates the really terrible call. The line ball ones would be just as controversial with no review system.

 

[baldandbroke]

I don’t know who’s right or wrong on this, but if that wasn’t deliberate last night, then you might as well turf the rule, because it isn’t fit for purpose.

That was as deliberate as any rushed behind in the game’s history. But I can understand why the umpire didn’t pay it — nobody wants that to decide a game.

It’s a stupid rule. Get rid of it. For 110 years you were able to rush a behind, and the game did just fine.

Yep, agreed. Get rid of it.

I also think they should allow deliberate kicks out of bounds from inside your defensive 50m to outside the defensive 50m. Would help break the lock down that happens nowadays with the defenders pushing up so far.

 

[mtbkym]

Speaking of rule changes, or lack of, when did umpires become so lenient with how far players can run without bouncing the ball?

I was shocked when Rich was rightly called late in the game but have seen many way worse than that this year.

Sent from my CPH1903 using BigFooty.com mobile app

His name isn’t Patrick Cripps?

 

[kirky]

I am not using the eye test, or basing it on what other people have said. I am basing it on what the words of the rule say.

The words to not talk about events happening in any sequence.

The words are clear. If any ONE of the four events occurs (which includes any combination, for obvious reasons), it is a free kick.

1. Rushed outside 9 metres.
2. Not under pressure.
3. Had time and space to dispose of the ball.
4. Ruck hits it over the line on the full.

Each a separate element. That's what the rule says. It is obvious that the umps don't pay it that way. But that is what the rule says.

Sheesh.

No, they aren’t separate a), b) or c).

Only d) is separate as the word “or” is used after the description of c) otherwise or would have been used after the wording for a) or b).

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Has Nathan Buckley ruled himself out of coaching next season?

 

[cleanhands]

Has Nathan Buckley ruled himself out of coaching next season?

I think I read somewhere he’s not sure he’ll coach again

 

[feenix67]

That kick wasn’t really a choke. It’s a tough-ish kick. He should kick it, but it just needs to hit the wrong spot on the ball and it misses.

His earlier shot from 45 pretty much directly in front was a bigger choke.


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

It's not really a tough kick at all. The mistake he made was kicking a checkside. Too much room for error. Was a very simple left foot snap.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I think I read somewhere he’s not sure he’ll coach again

Enjoying the media & less stress.

He is best having at least another year off to refresh.

... though having a joint ticket with Hird at Essendon would be funny for the lols.

 

[cleanhands]

Enjoying the media & less stress.

He is best having at least another year off to refresh.

... though having a joint ticket with Hird at Essendon would be funny for the lols.

Clash of personalities

 

[Slippery Pete]

Why does there need to be a soft call on field? Football and cricket

If you're not sure and are just making a best guess why can't the 'soft call' be unsure? All power to the video reviewer with a default process for if the video is also inconclusive

Problem with the AFL system is that the video umpire is acting on a balance of probabilities, and that is not the role of a video umpire in any sport.

You go to the technology for conclusive evidence. If it doesn’t exist, it goes back to the umpire on the field.

The video umpire is not supposed to be just some extra guy’s opinion, but that’s how they’re using it and that’s how it was used the other night.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Problem with the AFL system is that the video umpire is acting on a balance of probabilities, and that is not the role of a video umpire in any sport.

You go to the technology for conclusive evidence. If it doesn’t exist, it goes back to the umpire on the field.

The video umpire is not supposed to be just some extra guy’s opinion, but that’s how they’re using it and that’s how it was used the other night.

The AFL has the system. The AFL is just using it wrong.

This is how it should run.

• The automatic position of a review should be to prove it wasn't the lowest score or non score possible.
• All onfield umpires should automatically call for a review if a player is claiming touched.
• All goals should receive and indepth review before a centre bounce. The fact they haven't done it has seen clearly touched balls and balls that have hit the post slide through this grey area. It is even so bad, the question is whether it actually does gets done because when was the last time we saw a decision called back. I haven't seen one this year.

 

[FR0GGY]

That sort of tech is definitely possible too.

One of my mates a few years back developed a lightweight sensor you could insert into an AFL ball (and other types of sports balls) for tracking. It was pretty crazy what this thing could do. Not sure what happened to that tech but I don't think the AFL was interested

Eddie Maguire is trying to get a chip in the balls.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Eddie Maguire is trying to get a chip in the balls.

Wouldn't the easiest solution just be to incorporate hawkeye

 

[FR0GGY]

Wouldn't the easiest solution just be to incorporate hawkeye

Not sure how that works really.