Goal review cheating a new AFL low

[saynta]

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/ ... da7214cc3b


"The AFL has acted swiftly after calls for the score review system to be fixed after insufficient vision meant Christian Petracca’s match-winning goal was unable to be properly judged in Melbourne’s narrow win over St Kilda.

AFL: An incredible goal from Christian Petracca was soon overshadowed by a controversial and crucial decision by the ARC.

The AFL will install goal-line cameras at all venues for the remainder of the season after Melbourne’s Christian Petracca was controversially awarded a match-winning goal in Saturday night’s three-point win over St Kilda.

With no goal-line camera at TIO Traeger Park, the AFL’s ARC operators were unable to determine if the desperate lunge of St Kilda defender Dougal Howard allowed him to touch the ball before, on or after it crossed the line.

It prompted calls from Demons coach Simon Goodwin and Richmond great Matthew Richardson for the AFL to ensure every venue hosting matches has appropriate score review technology, while Saints coach Brett Ratten put it back on the league to decide whether the league wanted to invest money in the system.

While the AFL backed the decision of the ARC to defer to the umpire’s call — which was a goal — the league will install cameras at all venues hosting matches for the remainder of the season.

“The AFL advises all venues hosting AFL matches for the rest of the 2020 Toyota AFL Premiership Season (including finals) will have goal-line cameras installed, ensuring the best available vision and consistent technology is in place for each of the remaining games,” the league said in a statement.
.
Despite the crucial decision going Melbourne’s way, Goodwin was vocal post-game, declaring goal-line cameras should be installed at every venue that hosts AFL games.

Petracca was initially stiff not to have been paid the mark, using his brutal strength to snare the ball with Callum Wilkie hanging off him and two other Saints in the vicinity.

Petracca slammed the ball onto his boot while being tackled and, after the Sherrin took a lucky turn and dribbled towards the goal, St Kilda’s Dougal Howard, after a desperate lunge, was adamant he touched it before it crossed the line."

Vision inconclusive but our very own chuck can say that the ball was clearly over the line before it was touched. f****** unbelievable.

The umpire a metre away said it wasn't touched before it crossed the line, and I think he has a much better view then geriatrics sitting in their recliners with their bifocals on!

I couldn't tell, chuck but you obviously have better vision than all of us. Guess we should start calling you superman.

I'm backing the umpire 1 metre away to have the best idea, anyone claiming they or someone else knows better are just plain ignorant. And the bad camera angles didn't show anything that made it look like it was the wrong call.

And you already refer to me as Chuck Norris, so superman would probably be a downgrade

You got the wrong again chuck, but what else is new. A Chuck is the male version of a Karen.

Anyway, Howard was closer and he claims he touched it before the ball was completely over the line.

The maggot wasn't certain, but THOUGHT it was a goal, hence the goal review which was inconclusive.

The ball was not CLEARLY over the line as previously stated by you. Get your f****** facts right.

You calling somebody else plain ignorant is pot, kettle, black material.

[portosaint]

I'm not even sure what everyone is arguing about.

Were we stiffed by the AFL system. Yes. (In typical St Kilda fashion)

Was it a case of cheating by the umpires. Not even remotely.

Technology (or lack thereof) let us down. But no more than we let ourselves down.

Considering our history with umpires Nick Foote and Mr Bean, I thought the game was umpired to a reasonable standard. They certainly performed more admirably than the St Kilda football club did on Saturday night.

[The_Dud]

You got the wrong again chuck, but what else is new. A Chuck is the male version of a Karen.

Hahaha, is that what they're saying around the old folks home??

[Mr Magic]

I'm backing the umpire 1 metre away to have the best idea, anyone claiming they or someone else knows better are just plain ignorant. And the bad camera angles didn't show anything that made it look like it was the wrong call.

So why on earth did the AFL feel the need to bring in the technology at all.
After all, the umpire was only a meter away from that infamous call in the 2009 GF and clearly saw it as a goal.
Dud, your obstinant defense of anything to do with umpiring is equally annoying as Curly's cheating calls.

[The_Dud]

I'm backing the umpire 1 metre away to have the best idea, anyone claiming they or someone else knows better are just plain ignorant. And the bad camera angles didn't show anything that made it look like it was the wrong call.

So why on earth did the AFL feel the need to bring in the technology at all.
After all, the umpire was only a meter away from that infamous call in the 2009 GF and clearly saw it as a goal.
Dud, your obstinant defense of anything to do with umpiring is equally annoying as Curly's cheating calls.

Because there are sometimes when the umpires doesn't get the best view. For example if there's big marking pack on the line, or if it's to review a touched off the boot scenario that could happen 20 metres away.

The umpire was right on the line watching a ball that wasn't moving too fast with nothing to obscure him. Pretty sure he was in the best place to make a call. As with all close calls they like to go up to the review, sometimes painfully so, which is what he did.

Claims that he should call a point even if he thinks it's a goal, or that he thought the ball was touched before the line, or that it was somehow again a part of a grand conspiracy is just pure trolling or ignorance.

The only mistake here is that there should have been a goal line camera, if only to shut up the whingers, but guaranteed no matter what it would have shown they still would have sooked, judging by the realities they've invented in this thread already.

[saynta]

I'm backing the umpire 1 metre away to have the best idea, anyone claiming they or someone else knows better are just plain ignorant. And the bad camera angles didn't show anything that made it look like it was the wrong call.

So why on earth did the AFL feel the need to bring in the technology at all.
After all, the umpire was only a meter away from that infamous call in the 2009 GF and clearly saw it as a goal.
Dud, your obstinant defense of anything to do with umpiring is equally annoying as Curly's cheating calls.

f****** well said Mr M.

[saynta]

I'm backing the umpire 1 metre away to have the best idea, anyone claiming they or someone else knows better are just plain ignorant. And the bad camera angles didn't show anything that made it look like it was the wrong call.

So why on earth did the AFL feel the need to bring in the technology at all.
After all, the umpire was only a meter away from that infamous call in the 2009 GF and clearly saw it as a goal.
Dud, your obstinant defense of anything to do with umpiring is equally annoying as Curly's cheating calls.

Because there are sometimes when the umpires doesn't get the best view. For example if there's big marking pack on the line, or if it's to review a touched off the boot scenario that could happen 20 metres away.

The umpire was right on the line watching a ball that wasn't moving too fast with nothing to obscure him. Pretty sure he was in the best place to make a call. As with all close calls they like to go up to the review, sometimes painfully so, which is what he did.

Claims that he should call a point even if he thinks it's a goal, or that he thought the ball was touched before the line, or that it was somehow again a part of a grand conspiracy is just pure trolling or ignorance.

The only mistake here is that there should have been a goal line camera, if only to shut up the whingers, but guaranteed no matter what it would have shown they still would have sooked, judging by the realities they've invented in this thread already.

The only one sooking here Chuck is you.

[st.byron]

I'm not even sure what everyone is arguing about.

Were we stiffed by the AFL system. Yes. (In typical St Kilda fashion)

Was it a case of cheating by the umpires. Not even remotely.

Technology (or lack thereof) let us down. But no more than we let ourselves down.

Considering our history with umpires Nick Foote and Mr Bean, I thought the game was umpired to a reasonable standard. They certainly performed more admirably than the St Kilda football club did on Saturday night.

Voice of reason

[samuraisaint]

Goal or Behind it could well be the decision that decides if the Saints play finals or not.

No, the decision that ultimately impacts whether we play finals or not depends on whether our on-field leaders will step up when it matters most - when the game is in the balance. We are still safely inside the Top Eight now playing the fifteenth and ninth ranked teams in our final three matches. We should win both of them. Our fate is in our own hands.

There was no sense of urgency last week against the Lions or on Saturday night versus Melbourne when our club leaders needed to take the initiative by taking the game by the throat and do the things that matter. Our own players were kicking the ball towards the boundary in both of those matches with precious seconds ticking down. I mean come on. Where was thee direction from our leaders then? Betcha Roo and Goddard wouldn't have let that happen. Nor Lenny Hayes. They would've been right in there amongst the action - Joey too.

Remember this - "fatigue makes cowards of us all" - Vince Lombardi said that.

Cometh the hour, cometh the man.

We'll win Sunday and we'll still be in the Eight. Then it is a matter of our five year + players to step up and lead us to victory in at least one of the final two matches. Somebody on the field needs to do it.

[SaintPav]

I'm backing the umpire 1 metre away to have the best idea, anyone claiming they or someone else knows better are just plain ignorant. And the bad camera angles didn't show anything that made it look like it was the wrong call.

So why on earth did the AFL feel the need to bring in the technology at all.
After all, the umpire was only a meter away from that infamous call in the 2009 GF and clearly saw it as a goal.
Dud, your obstinant defense of anything to do with umpiring is equally annoying as Curly's cheating calls.

Beautifully put.

Been saying it for months.

[saynta]

I think posters are utterly sick of your continual defence of maggots on this board Chuck. Utterly sick of it.