Review Post game review v SUNS

[Willsy10]

As explained to me, by the father of an AFL goal umpire…

If the ball passes through the goals, at less than the height of the padding, then the back of padding becomes the goal line.

If it passes above the padding, the back of the post is the goal line.

For me, it becomes more farcical when the ball is dribbling through the goals (I.e. below the top of the padding), they appear to use the line not the back of the padding.

I didn’t know this. I thought the padding only came into play if it is actually hit but if it’s kicked between the two sticks you go by the goal line. Seems like a pretty stupid rule to use an imaginary line from the back of each respective goal post pad instead of umm let me think the actual line that’s painted on the ground.

And as you said a dribble kick only needs to go past the line? Dumb dumb rules.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Schulzenfest]

Lycett who is worse than Hayes coming straight back in as Ken is implying is pretty disgusting.

Yet another reason for me to lose even more interest in watching this team. People telling us to 'just enjoy the win' can go **** themselves. I'm not going to enjoy a thing this club does until it sacks Hinkley, and hopefully he takes Motlop and Lycett with him.

 

[Tibbs]

They got 2-3 softish frees in the f50, but it didn't feel like outright cheating like most other weeks.

The one area that bugged me ... Multiple clear push-in-backs not paid to Porr, but the umpires happily payed them against us, ala, Rozee's on Swallow.

The inconsistency really irritates!

 

[JohnHinckleyJr]

What if it passes halfway above and halfway below the height of the padding?

You get a 7 pointer

 

[Bundilla]

The bigger question is, why does the padding have anything to do with it?

 

[Blinky Nyland]

We play 3 of the top 4 in the next month...

That should put an end to hinklor's career.

What if we win them?

 

[Willsy10]

It was a see sawing contest but I thought for the majority of the match we played pretty well but the thing that disappointed me the most was our last 4-5 minutes, we did our best to shit the bed like we did in the showdown earlier this year. Thankfully we had a bit more luck this time around but we’ve got some work to do in the closing out tight games space. Was a strength last year but we are struggling with it this year.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Garibaldi Red]

What if it crossed the line and hit the back of the padding?

Again, if we just used the line (like every other normal sport out there).....

I reckon that happened last year, can’t recall the game. Given as a point and BT questioned it.

 

[PPort]

My no idea, no nonsense review,

Shite players: Jonas, anyone can run past him.

Motlop, see ya later - maybe never.

Amon, quiet.

Burton, panicky for him.

Bonner, worst game this year - kept handing it to oppo.

Mead, very average I thought.

Drew, quieter than usual I thought.

Fredrick, not much to notice.


Fair players: Ollie, a bit quiet.

Durs, ok when he was there , but has to do more.

Trav, very little influence and usual average disposal

Mitch, ok - but spoiled as sure fire goal/mark for Todd.

Allir, likely needs more support.

SPP, good at times but a bit inconsistent tonight.

Mackenzie, lousy I though - a theme for him this season, can any of our defenders win a one on one.?


Top players; Rosie, guess you've got to put Conner as our best tonight - he was great.

Toddy, keeps on kicking em.

Chaz, I'm always critical of Charlie but he was good tonight in ruck and strong enough to need multiple opposition all nite long.

Dan, generally good.

Farrel, did well enough tonight

Finlayson, did his bit and tried hard all night/day.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

As explained to me, by the father of an AFL goal umpire…

If the ball passes through the goals, at less than the height of the padding, then the back of padding becomes the goal line.

If it passes above the padding, the back of the post is the goal line.

For me, it becomes more farcical when the ball is dribbling through the goals (I.e. below the top of the padding), they appear to use the line not the back of the padding.

Have a look at the posts on an AFL field one day. The back of the padding sits on the back of the goal line.

 

[Festerz]

I didn’t know this. I thought the padding only came into play if it is actually hit but if it’s kicked between the two sticks you go by the goal line. Seems like a pretty stupid rule to use an imaginary line from the back of each respective goal post pad instead of umm let me think the actual line that’s painted on the ground.

And as you said a dribble kick only needs to go past the line? Dumb dumb rules.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

The goal line includes/extends up to the back edge of the post padding. So if the ball hits any part of the padding or is touched before the ball fully crosses the padding it is a behind.

The ground marking requirements in the AFL rule book make it quite clear the back edge of the goal post padding should be in line with the outer edge of the goal line

 

[Duckimus Prime]

The bigger question is, why does the padding have anything to do with it?

The padding and the back of the line are level, because its very unlikely get the line in the same frame for judging this exact situation.

I reckon that happened last year, can’t recall the game. Given as a point and BT questioned it.

The fact that it was BT should indicate that the comments were stupid.

 

[FourthTimeAround]

The goal line includes/extends up to the back edge of the post padding. So if the ball hits any part of the padding or is touched before the ball fully crosses the padding it is a behind.

The ground marking requirements in the AFL rule book make it quite clear the back edge of the goal post padding should be in line with the outer edge of the goal line

So a ball go through the goals at goal post height, but not cross the line.
Or a ball hits the post, without having reached the line.

Just another “anomaly” of our great game.

I’d get rid of “touched“ and “hit the post” personally.
Then its a goal because it went through, or it’s not because it didn’t.

 

[Troopsy]

Yet another reason for me to lose even more interest in watching this team. People telling us to 'just enjoy the win' can go * themselves. I'm not going to enjoy a thing this club does until it sacks Hinkley, and hopefully he takes Motlop and Lycett with him.

Has something happened behind the scenes with Hayes? I know it’s Hinkley, but it’s still baffling.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

So a ball go through the goals at goal post height, but not cross the line.

Good luck with this ever physically occuring.

Or a ball hits the post, without having reached the line.

If the ball hits the goal post, then a behind is scored. It doesn't have to cross any line.

Just like if the ball hits a behind post, its out of play despite the fact that it never crosses the whole of a boundary line.

 

[Cam1870]

Hoping Kenny will do a Richard Møller Nielsen and just get out of the way and let the boys play care free alah Denmark 92

Definitely winner of the award for tonight's most obscure sporting analogy

 

[MrChow]

Good luck with this every physically occuring.


If the ball hits the goal post, then a behind is scored. It doesn't have to cross any line.

Just like if the ball hits a behind post, its out of play despite the fact that it never crosses the whole of a boundary line.

Just to add to it. If the goalpost camera was perfectly situated to measure exactly the back of the goal post padding, the centre of the lens, would be at the back of the goal post padding on the other side. And the framing of the image would have the back of the post perfectly in the centre of the shot. This would however be impossible, because then the lens housing and half of the lens glass would be sticking out the back of the goalpost padding.

So likely the cameras are further in, perhaps centred on the back of the goal line (would make sense), but then the reference point of the opposite post would not be the right line.

The AFL could develop a two tone goal post padding with a line to represent the goal line up the post. Also cameras on both sides of the goal post to cross reference.

This could cost someone a final.

 

[MrChow]

They could also use lasers and sensors, like in every “steal a diamond from an art gallery/museum” movie ever made

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Just to add to it. If the goalpost camera was perfectly situated to measure exactly the back of the goal post padding, the centre of the lens, would be at the back of the goal post padding on the other side. And the framing of the image would have the back of the post perfectly in the centre of the shot. This would however be impossible, because then the lens housing and half of the lens glass would be sticking out the back of the goalpost padding.

So likely the cameras are further in, perhaps centred on the back of the goal line (would make sense), but then the reference point of the opposite post would not be the right line.

The back of the goal line and the back of the padding are level.

 

[ROBBBO]

Very very lucky.
Chol's post edges x2 and Ainsworths goalkicking gave us some lucky breaks.
Marshall must be leading our B&F.
Lachie Jones is like a 12 month old bull terrier that you just know will become an awesome animal.
McKenzies last quarter was about as bad as you could play.
Didn't miss DBJ but Clurey we did miss.
Rozee was fantastic.
Good team Gold Coast. Very good win given our outs

 

[ROBBBO]

That would have to be worst game i've seen Amon has played for us, him and Motlop tonight..... complete shite performances, that was the possible difference tonight if we lost.... Dixon was a beast (BOG), Todd and Mitch played well as well as Fyn, Alir and Wines...

Good win, again, if you intend on playing keeps, we have to be leading to provide options to do so late in the game..... not side wide ways and backwards.

Amon was horrid despite the stat's I saw here earlier. Absolute shitshow from him tonight

 

[Garibaldi Red]

The padding and the back of the line are level, because its very unlikely get the line in the same frame for judging this exact situation.

The fact that it was BT should indicate that the comments were stupid.
View attachment 1433990

Well that shows how much attention I pay .

 

[rogerjames]

Absolutely rapt with that win. Had to leave at 3/4 time but loved the game. Both teams played exciting footy & was such good entertainment. Felt the boys really knew what was on the line today. Well done to GC too.

 

[rogerjames]

Witts 41 hitouts 8 clearances

Great ruck strategy that

Unsustainable me thinks, nearly cost us the game

 

[afl2004]

Y

Unsustainable me thinks, nearly cost us the game

If he didn't rest in the 2nd we defs lose