The goal that wasn't

[BringBackMadDog]

If there was any doubt about the score review system not working this was it. I was sittin directly side on to those goals and the mark was taken about a foot over the line. Every person around me including the Kiwis who knew stuff all about the game couldn't believe that it wasn't given a goal. If a decision this clear cant be judged correctly then the system doesn't work

[ShanghaiSaint]

If there was any doubt about the score review system not working this was it. I was sittin directly side on to those goals and the mark was taken about a foot over the line. Every person around me including the Kiwis who knew stuff all about the game couldn't believe that it wasn't given a goal. If a decision this clear cant be judged correctly then the system doesn't work

it's funny how all these fraaking things happen to us...

[perfectionist]

Why wasn't there a side on camera angle? Front on shot told us little, except that his feet were well behind the line.

[magnifisaint]

You're right. Richards was behind the goal line when he took the mark. Why aren't there cameras positioned side on

[matrix]

from the replays on fox it looked like a goal for sure

so if the goal ump says i think its a mark but not sure and they review it and its CLEARLY marked over the line,.... they wont reverse it?!
i guess you go with the umpire....great idea, do a review as you arent sure, find its wrong... but dont change the decision

money well spent

numpties

[gringo]

Sydney player took a kick in at one point and took three steps over the line before kicking it yet they can spot Kosi being too close to a yellow line.

[Teflon]

to much being spent on drugs.....not on cameras.

[bigcarl]

i was watching it on tv in Melbourne and could see easily that it was a metre over the line. But hey, s***, we're only struggling St Kilda, back holding up the bottom rungs of the ladder where the AFL likes us ... of course it goes in favour of Sydney

[gringo]

from the replays on fox it looked like a goal for sure

so if the goal ump says i think its a mark but not sure and they review it and its CLEARLY marked over the line,.... they wont reverse it?!
i guess you go with the umpire....great idea, do a review as you arent sure, find its wrong... but dont change the decision

money well spent

numpties

SEN said they were in disbelief and looked at the commentary team next to them and they were the same.

[Pwoit]

I bet the forum Numpty will argue that it was a mark.

[vacuous space]

Just ditch the reviews already. We have maybe 10 or 20 contentious goals each year out of hundreds. It's not worth slowing the game down for inconclusive results. Either put the cameras on the posts, or don't do it at all.

[saintspremiers]

The review system is faarked.

It must be changed IMMEDIATELY.

Wake up to yourself Evans.

[BigMart]

Definitely marked it............


A metre over the line......

I was in disbelief, as were the other dozen watching in the pub?!

Bizarre again

[Sainternist]

Imagine if they had to make a call like this to decide a GF. Heaven help the AFL in that situation.

So who were the tits making the decision on the video review? Larry, Moe and Curly?

[Jacks Back]

It seems to me that we are the only ones that are always on the receiving end of these things. If there is any way of screwing us the umpires (including the TV umpire) will screw us 10 times out of 10.

[creepypolar]

If there was any doubt about the score review system not working this was it. I was sittin directly side on to those goals and the mark was taken about a foot over the line. Every person around me including the Kiwis who knew stuff all about the game couldn't believe that it wasn't given a goal. If a decision this clear cant be judged correctly then the system doesn't work

Hey BBMD, how were the Kiwis? Loving the game?? Also do you know about what they thought of the saints

[matrix]

copy forum numpty number one
over


come in numpty number one


goal for sure huh?
stop arguing with numpty number two and bring him over here and add this thread to your tally


im guessing there was no goal line camera in these posts over in wellington?
otherwise there would have been an angle shown

[suss]

The umpire was over the line by miles when he made the call - got pushed by Roo from memory. They kicked a few from frees and we got nothing - could've made the difference.

[Greg T]

Don't worry, the d**khead Afl umps Geischen will say "oh shyte we made a mistake and that will make it all better.
Just like HAwkins shot hitting the post in 09 granny.
Mongrels

[Munga]

POS

[bergholt]

I thought his first touch was before the line which would make it a mark, but I was trying to eat a parma at the same time so probably didn't have the best view.

[Verdun66]

The goal ump was obscured by Rooey...and then the review is done by a camera not side on. Which is of course useless. No way the guy could see that on a replay. Sadly another bit of s%&t luck for us. Not sure how the goal umpire could say it was a goal when he clearly had been blocked by Roo.

Does the benefit of the doubt go to the defending team? In Rugby it goes to the attacking team.

[kosifantutti]

I thought his first touch was before the line which would make it a mark, but I was trying to eat a parma at the same time so probably didn't have the best view.

He has to complete the mark inside the field of play. That just didn't happen. It was either a point or a goal.

I thought the goal umpire said it was a point which would make the overruling a bizarre decision.

[plugger66]

The goal ump was obscured by Rooey...and then the review is done by a camera not side on. Which is of course useless. No way the guy could see that on a replay. Sadly another bit of s%&t luck for us. Not sure how the goal umpire could say it was a goal when he clearly had been blocked by Roo.

Does the benefit of the doubt go to the defending team? In Rugby it goes to the attacking team.

I beleive the umpire thought he touched or marked it on the goal line and then fumbled so he thought it was a point. the replay showed no fumble and couldnt be certain it was over the line so the mark stands.

[Skildir]

If it was any further over the line it would have been marked in Australia.