What do you expect the outcome to be from this amazing discovery of vision from port?
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Port Adelaide lose by 3 points after a wrong Goal Review against the Crows in the dying stages
- Thread starter PowerForGood
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Feb 21, 2009
- 15,446
- 11,832
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Ferrari, Chicago Bulls
I'll raise you a pat on the arse for an umpire marking Hartletts kick...
I am quoting the author, isn't that how quoting works? How does he know port wrote a letter, because they have discussed it. He wrote it because port told him
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
- Jun 16, 2014
- 2,069
- 2,378
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Norwood Redlegs, Athelstone Raggies
Only an apology and we won't lie again until next time
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
- Nov 14, 2007
- 48,271
- 26,740
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Oh, I think it is my teal adversary
Pretty sure your fat lady sang her feral guts out last night
Lol. I think your club is better off focused on next week than an apology. But what do I know. Clearly port consider an apology from the AFL priority number 1.
I think in 2 days from now they will regret the time they wasted on this.
Looks like a slight gap there.
Dav
Hotel? Trivago.
10k Posts
Koala
Coney Island Warriors - Sweet F.A.
Pantskyle
SFA Fight For MND
SFA Daffodil Day Fund Raiser
Brisbane Dolphins Player - BFFCL
BFFCL Club Captain
Blue Mountain Bounders Player - BFFCL
Players can hit the goalpost too. Plus, there would be a big difference between stumps and goalposts in terms of the tech.
- Jun 16, 2014
- 2,069
- 2,378
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Norwood Redlegs, Athelstone Raggies
Wait for the documentary "A Funny Thing happened On the way To The Showdown".
- Nov 14, 2007
- 48,271
- 26,740
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
So I guess Robbie Gray and Wingard are going to stop faking for frees then ?
- Feb 21, 2009
- 15,446
- 11,832
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Ferrari, Chicago Bulls
Relevance???? Oh there is none.
- Jun 16, 2014
- 2,069
- 2,378
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Norwood Redlegs, Athelstone Raggies
Clearly on the goal side of the icing
- Feb 21, 2009
- 15,446
- 11,832
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Ferrari, Chicago Bulls
How many times do you need to quote the same picture?They got the ball on the wrong side of the bun
- Nov 14, 2007
- 48,271
- 26,740
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Subject I was responding to was one of lying
I notice you chose to ignore the pics of the in the back on Eddie!
Selective
No. Authors write shit that's wrong all the time, sometimes they get mixed up, sometimes their opinion is wrong, sometimes they just make it up.
That statement about behind the goal vision is the author's opinion, doesn't mean he is right, maybe he is, maybe he isn't.
Yes he knows Port wrote a letter because they told him, and he provided the direct quote from Port as evidence of this.
Port Adelaide football chief Chris Davies told The Advertiser on Sunday: “We have written to the AFL asking what angles (Murphy) saw — and what vision the AFL saw hours after the game and why this was not immediately available for score review during the game.”
If Port had some new vision which clearly shows it hitting the post then he would have quoted that too.
He didn't. Why? Probably because they never said it.
The afl didn't even come out and say he pushed goal instead of umpires call, which they admit themselves footage is inconclusive, yet with too many lies in one press release, what can you believe. Afl has shot themselves in foot on this one.
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
- Nov 14, 2007
- 48,271
- 26,740
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I’m out
This conspiracy theory is too out there for me
Take it to the Bay and I can let you know there what I think of your “theories”
Adios
They said he confirmed the goal umpire decision, that's pushing the goal button.
They didn't say it was inconclusive, they said there was no clear evidence to over rule.
“After reviewing all relevant angles for 23 seconds, the score review official determined there was no clear evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the preliminary call of goal was incorrect, and hence a goal was confirmed. It is the AFL determination that after accessing all relevant vision this evening, it supported the decision of the reviewer to confirm the goal umpire’s decision of a goal, with no clear evidence beyond reasonable doubt to make an over-rule.”
MattyB_76
Club Legend
Cards on the table, the author of the article is Michaelangelo Rucci, who is so far up the ass of the PAFC he knows what they had to eat for breakfast.
If Port really have have additional footage, then show it, back up your coach. PAFC have nothing to lose. So what are they waiting for?
We don't have camera angles that SHOW the ball hitting the post because the ball didn't hit the post.
The goal umpire was in a great position right under the ball and his call was a goal. No evidence otherwise.
Why did he say he didn't know if it hit post then?
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
He didn't. He said he thought it was a goal but just wanted to check to make sure.
Similar threads
