Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
desertsaint wrote: ↑Sun 20 Aug 2023 10:59am
big ripple effect. geelong out, crows out, essendon out - all on this result. and potentially us as well. possibly the worst call ever given goal technology didn't exist in 2009.
It's a decision that has potentially affected 5 out of the 8 teams fighting for the 5th-8th position. Definitely Sydney and the Crows, and potentially the Giants, Saints and Dogs.
The AFL will try to move the conversation on as quickly as possible, as they always do. It would really suit them for Melbourne to beat the Swans next weekend to avoid any further controvery. Otherwise it will all blow up again.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
saynta wrote: ↑Sat 19 Aug 2023 11:38pm
Didn't hit the post at all. Saints robbed.
Par for the course
After just watching a game where we ‘won’ the free kick count 20-5 (!!!) you still find a way to whinge about the umpires.
Pat for the course
What the Royal F@rk are you on about - talk about playing the man - Have you opened your F@rking Eyes and looked at the Vision
4 actual Brawls started in Adelaide because of this ridiculous call
It was a sh!t decision and it affected US - how the F@rk do you equate that to a free kick count when we were first to the ball - Geelong were lethargic and not interested
You are a truly SAD individual and a keyboard warrior
THE UMPIRE in his Unprofessional opinion GOT IT F@RKING WRONG and will be umpiring the Upper Humpty Doo 5th Next week.
I have called for the ARC to review everything that would cause a fan to spit his beer - and this was one of those cases
PS - It is PAR for the Course - not F@rking PAT for the course - who the F@rk is Pat??????
Again - you are a SAD individual - who reeks of Trollness and Un St Kilda like persona
Go to R/AFL - 6 threads with over 1,000 comments in total about this farce.
“Talk about playing the man” he cries as he plays the man.
Is there a word for that?
But it’s just pat for the course I suppose…
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
SaintPav wrote: ↑Sun 20 Aug 2023 11:30am
Bloke in the Arc studio was taking a smoko..
Someone back there needed to flag it while the game was still going, at least then they could take the ball back and maybe put time back on the clock, if they’re allowed to do that?
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
SaintPav wrote: ↑Sun 20 Aug 2023 11:30am
Bloke in the Arc studio was taking a smoko..
Someone back there needed to flag it while the game was still going, at least then they could take the ball back and maybe put time back on the clock, if they’re allowed to do that?
Agree. I don’t know the process.
That behind the goal footage you posted was extraordinary.
Total stuff up
Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
skeptic wrote: ↑Sat 19 Aug 2023 11:56pm
Geeez, the zeroed in on it on channel 7… it definitely missed the post. Frame by frame there was a noticeable gap
They said it hit the back of the goal post padding - which is still a behind - but Adelaide should have asked for a review. Plus the play on straight away with everyone in the protected area was ridiculous.
So there’s separate camera angles…
The one from the other side shows that it was well well above the padding when it passed. More than 1m above the padding. No chance it hit
skeptic wrote: ↑Sat 19 Aug 2023 11:56pm
Geeez, the zeroed in on it on channel 7… it definitely missed the post. Frame by frame there was a noticeable gap
They said it hit the back of the goal post padding - which is still a behind - but Adelaide should have asked for a review. Plus the play on straight away with everyone in the protected area was ridiculous.
So there’s separate camera angles…
The one from the other side shows that it was well well above the padding when it passed. More than 1m above the padding. No chance it hit
Is someone seriously suggesting it hit the padding? If so, they’re dreaming.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
The AFL has said the call was a mistake and that a review, using the available technology, would have produced a goal.
Some in the media are saying that it has denied Adelaide a possible finals place. This would require WCE beating WB and Carlton beating the Giants or Melbourne beating Sydney. The first hurdle seem the largest, but we'll know later today.
One mini spooky thing about the Adelaide game was the final points scores 74 to 73. As far as I can tell, this has happened ten times in the past, with a famous occurrence in 1966.
"AFL reporter Damien Barrett spoke about the topic on the Sunday Footy Show and stated the goal umpire would be stood down.
“The goal umpire has (made a mistake). It is a mistake. The AFL has conceded that,” Barrett said.
“I expect now that goal umpire to be stood down and therefore removed from the possibilities of finals action as a result of this decision.
“Gillon McLachlan will put the AFL’s name and words to this officially. But this is what they’ve decided overnight, having spoken to all people attached to the situation, and this morning have determined that.
“We empower goal umpires to make the call in the moment. That goal umpire couldn’t have been in a better position to make that call. He just got it wrong. The AFL concedes it’s a mistake.”
"AFL reporter Damien Barrett spoke about the topic on the Sunday Footy Show and stated the goal umpire would be stood down.
“The goal umpire has (made a mistake). It is a mistake. The AFL has conceded that,” Barrett said.
“I expect now that goal umpire to be stood down and therefore removed from the possibilities of finals action as a result of this decision.
“Gillon McLachlan will put the AFL’s name and words to this officially. But this is what they’ve decided overnight, having spoken to all people attached to the situation, and this morning have determined that.
“We empower goal umpires to make the call in the moment. That goal umpire couldn’t have been in a better position to make that call. He just got it wrong. The AFL concedes it’s a mistake.”
meher baba wrote: ↑Sun 20 Aug 2023 11:55am
Is someone seriously suggesting it hit the padding? If so, they’re dreaming.
The angle showed live on TV had it clearly missing the post and then going near the padding (from that angle). The coach in the presser said he thought it hit the padding, too - likely from the same footage.
The opposite angle was only showed after the game and it clearly missed the padding.
meher baba wrote: ↑Sun 20 Aug 2023 11:55am
Is someone seriously suggesting it hit the padding? If so, they’re dreaming.
The angle showed live on TV had it clearly missing the post and then going near the padding (from that angle). The coach in the presser said he thought it hit the padding, too - likely from the same footage.
The opposite angle was only showed after the game and it clearly missed the padding.
Watching it in real time, it looked like it had clearly missed everything on the way through.
There can be no excuses: it was just one of those monumental goal umpiring stuff-ups, like the one that gifted Tom Hawkins an undeserved goal in the 2009 GF. Or, for that matter, the one that gave a behind to Aussie Jones in 2004, and set up a celebrated winning goal by Troy Schwarze that by rights shouldn't have happened.
It's time to get rid of goal umpires I reckon. Yes, they have been a colourful part of the game, but they are something of an anachronism. Most of their decisions could be made just as easily (and, I suspect, accurately) by the field umpires with help from the video ref.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
