Roast The Non Goal: F*** the AFL, court injunction?

[cleanhands]

You know, I liked your Borlase quip last night

I thought you missed the op to compare their speed across the ground as well though

It could have been multiple choice

 

[dogs105]

Those stills prove nothing, except it was close. There is parallax error there.

They also prove that the AFL should stop filming these with a potato...

 

[MsTopG]

They also prove that the AFL should stop filming these with a potato...

30 frames per second. May as well not even use those cameras.

 

[FR0GGY]

Those stills prove nothing, except it was close. There is parallax error there.

Glad I’m not the only one thinking that

 

[FR0GGY]

They also prove that the AFL should stop filming these with a potato...

It’s a good potato though

 

[MsTopG]

Saints should get pumped. Feel the crows would have taken care of the saints as well.
Brisbane V Pies gf looks most likely.

 

[FR0GGY]

They also prove that the AFL should stop filming these with a potato...

It’s the equivalent of having Jobe Watson doing special comments.

 

[WAG]

Glad to see the cheating swans go out. The rightful finalist Adelaide would have put up a better fight imo. Haven't watched a final after our injustice. As long as powaa doesn't win I couldn't care less who wins the flag.

How did the Swans cheat again?

 

[rocket18]

How did the Swans cheat again?

Their player hitting the post as the ball crossed the line.

Thus making a noise, making post move and taking snicko out of play.

 

[MsTopG]

Their player hitting the post as the ball crossed the line.

Thus making a noise, making post move and taking snicko out of play.

Yeah they have a history of post tampering. If not for that player that hit the post we likely are playing finals.

 

[Crow till I die]

Saints should get pumped. Feel the crows would have taken care of the saints as well.
Brisbane V Pies gf looks most likely.

I think a few of those sides were more than happy the crows were dudded by the AFL out of a finals spot

 

[Slippery Pete]

Those stills prove nothing, except it was close. There is parallax error there.

I could not believe when the video umpire came back with a conclusive decision.

It turned out to be uncontroversial because it was the goal umpire’s decision anyway, but the fact that the video umpire thought he could judge that conclusively sums up everything wrong with the system. It’s so amateur.

The video umpire is supposed to be definitive, not just another guess from an overriding third party.

And often he can’t (or shouldn’t) be definitive because he doesn’t have the technology to be.

 

[Geoffa32]

At least it went to a review....

.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Gtowncrow]

He seems to have really long fingers

Just saying ..

You might well be right. The close up actually does look Photoshopped...poorly.
Weird knuckle location on a couple of those fingers.
Just saying

 

[jenny61_99]

You might well be right. The close up actually does look Photoshopped...poorly.
Weird knuckle location on a couple of those fingers.
Just saying

 

[ams4crows]

The gentleman who made the free kick differential video for home, away, Vic and non Vic teams has another video to show which teams benefited and which ones got reamed and in a suprise to no one Adelaide and Gold Coast had more Bad free kick differential games than any other team

TikTok - Make Your Day

 

[MsTopG]

The gentleman who made the free kick differential video for home, away, Vic and non Vic teams has another video to show which teams benefited and which ones got reamed and in a suprise to no one Adelaide and Gold Coast had more Bad free kick differential games than any other team

TikTok - Make Your Day

Of course we finished first on the umpire reamed ladder. Just watching the games you can see that the umpires go out their way to find free kicks for the opposition and make it as hard as possible for us to win the game. I would like to see this stat over the last 20 years as I'm fairly confident would be in the top 2-3 every year. It's fairly obvious that out of all the teams the ones involving us would be the easiest for umpires to influence the result as there's never an outcry from the club or media about bad free kicks against us. All Nicks would be likely to say is that these factors don't influence the result which is complete horseshit. Just once I would like to see the club jump up and down about free kicks and wear the fine as nothing is ever done about it and it happens year after year.

 

[Slippery Pete]

At least it went to a review....

.

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

And that’s been the whole problem from the start, they’re sending it to the review to avoid the Keays-type howler, but then the video umpire plays God with footage filmed on a potato.

That’s not what he should be doing.

In fact there shouldn’t even be a human involved in the referral decision. It should be a conclusive technology call — like Hawk-Eye in tennis.

If you can’t get that, I’d just prefer we went back to putting up with the howlers to be honest.

 

[SugarShane]

And that’s been the whole problem from the start, they’re sending it to the review to avoid the Keays-type howler, but then the video umpire plays God with footage filmed on a potato.

That’s not what he should be doing.

In fact there shouldn’t even be a human involved in the referral decision. It should be a conclusive technology call — like Hawk-Eye in tennis.

If you can’t get that, I’d just prefer we went back to putting up with the howlers to be honest.

Cricket has the same issue where they rely on technology, but then still don't fully trust it. We end up with the "umpire's call" stuff because we don't trust a supercomputer when 49% of the ball is hitting the stumps so we revert back to the overweight and short sighted 60 year old standing out in 40 degree heat.

If we're using technology let's just use technology. But "umpires know best", and the "umpire was in the best position to see"... If I had to bet my life on a goal umpire or hawkeye getting a decision right, I'd be staking it on Hawkeye.

 

[BRL121]

Cricket has the same issue where they rely on technology, but then still don't fully trust it. We end up with the "umpire's call" stuff because we don't trust a supercomputer when 49% of the ball is hitting the stumps so we revert back to the overweight and short sighted 60 year old standing out in 40 degree heat.

If we're using technology let's just use technology. But "umpires know best", and the "umpire was in the best position to see"... If I had to bet my life on a goal umpire or hawkeye getting a decision right, I'd be staking it on Hawkeye.

What they are doing is correct. No technology is perfect. There is always an uncertainty of some degree.
In the case of ball tracking, there may be a quite large uncertainty due to extrapolation.

 

[baldandbroke]

What they are doing is correct. No technology is perfect. There is always an uncertainty of some degree.
In the case of ball tracking, there may be a quite large uncertainty due to extrapolation.

No.

The technology’s extrapolation is many times more accurate than the human’s extrapolation.

 

[BRL121]

No.

The technology’s extrapolation is many times more accurate than the human’s extrapolation.

Not necessarily. For example, in LBW appeals where the ball pitches just before the pads, especially from a spinner, and especially well down the pitch, neither the human nor the technology will be any good. Rather than accepting the technology "out" in those cases, it's much more sensible to use the umpire's cautious "not out" when he can't be sure it's out.
There will never be a technological certainty in such situations.

 

[Coopers]

Not necessarily. For example, in LBW appeals where the ball pitches just before the pads, especially from a spinner, and especially well down the pitch, neither the human nor the technology will be any good. Rather than accepting the technology "out" in those cases, it's much more sensible to use the umpire's cautious "not out" when he can't be sure it's out.
There will never be a technological certainty in such situations.

I wouldn't say never.
I can imagine lidar systems improve to the point where you track a ball moving with microsecond sample rates in a 3d recreation. You'd be super accurate at predicting the path of movement.

There is lidar that fast now. Just no idea how you deploy it on a cricket pitch. Need to make it magically work from the stands somehow.

 

[Gtowncrow]

What they are doing is correct. No technology is perfect. There is always an uncertainty of some degree.
In the case of ball tracking, there may be a quite large uncertainty due to extrapolation.

I like the technology.
I've seen many sports leap ahead as technology has allowed. For example, the radar projections of golf shots are unbelievably accurate. The cricket projection of the last metre or so in a lbw decision is very, very basic technology nowadays.
I'm happy to avoid the "umpire's call".

AFL use of available technology is extremely poor. Embarrassing really. Although it doesn't matter when you are a game played by a few states in the sparsely populated, far away country.

 

[FR0GGY]

I’ve always wondered with tennis why they don’t side by side screen freeze frame show the ball landing like the do with Hawkeye.
Sometimes the ball looks so far away on initial footage and then Hawkeye shows it close to the line, I don’t believe it.