Goal Umpiring

[lazy]

Happy we won but might it have been more comfortable? Anyone else reckon the Dawson goal was clearly a point. Also I only saw one replay but I could have sworn I saw the Varcoe angled goal hit the padding.

[bigcarl]

there should be an inquiry into it. how anyone could miss zac's fist is beyond me.

rank incompetence that could have cost the better team on the night the match.

[plugger66]

there should be an inquiry into it. how anyone could miss zac's fist is beyond me.

rank incompetence that could have cost the better team on the night the match.

It is called a mistake. It happens. Are you suggeste=ing the goal umpires cheated?

[wasaintsfan]

2 final matches vs geelong

2 goals that shouldnt have been in crucial times

[bigcarl]

there should be an inquiry into it. how anyone could miss zac's fist is beyond me.

rank incompetence that could have cost the better team on the night the match.

It is called a mistake. It happens. Are you suggeste=ing the goal umpires cheated?

no, i called him incompetent.

[saintsareprettygoodhey]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

[bigred]

Terrible, lazy decision and downright reeks of a guy that really isn't all that in touch with footy.

Incompetent is the word.

[fonz_#15]

another question.. whatever happened to the kicking in danger rule? Zac's hands would have been kicked on that play, thus being kicking in danger.

it looked touched from where i was behind the goals.

[#1GILL]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

[saintspremiers]

there should be an inquiry into it. how anyone could miss zac's fist is beyond me.

rank incompetence that could have cost the better team on the night the match.

It is called a mistake. It happens. Are you suggeste=ing the goal umpires cheated?

no, i called him incompetent.

look, I don't blame the goal umpire.

I don't blame the field umpires or boundary umpires for that matter.

I BLAME the AFL for being so farking ignorant to the use of technology for goal umpiring decisions.

Why can't they have a challenge system like in Tennis?

Give each team, say, 2 challenges (or maybe 3) per match......get 3 wrong, and no more, get them right, and it stays a live challenge.

Surely that is not too hard an idea for Dimwit and Monkey boy to get their collective "heads" around??

[plugger66]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

If the ball is kicked with a hand on it , it should be paid a goal. I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

[saintspremiers]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

If the ball is kicked with a hand on it , it should be paid a goal. I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

you never do Tugger.

You are the biggest AFL-lacky this site has ever seen....

[St Chris]

another question.. whatever happened to the kicking in danger rule? Zac's hands would have been kicked on that play, thus being kicking in danger.

it looked touched from where i was behind the goals.

I believe the kicking in danger "interpretation" was changed that their needed to be an intent to injure, which is impossible to pay anymore.

[bigcarl]

I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

i do. a decision like that will cost a team a premiership one day ... or even a very important final like today's.

umpires should think before they decide to play god. there is a lot riding on their decisions.

it was a turning point in the match, compounded by the rain and gave geelong a glimmer when they deserved none.

[Solar]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

If the ball is kicked with a hand on it , it should be paid a goal. I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

actually they are instructed to pay the lower score......

[plugger66]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

If the ball is kicked with a hand on it , it should be paid a goal. I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

you never do Tugger.

You are the biggest AFL-lacky this site has ever seen....

Why because I dont care after winning. I think it is hilarous that anyone would care after one of our best wins ever. Hilarous.

[fonz_#15]

another question.. whatever happened to the kicking in danger rule? Zac's hands would have been kicked on that play, thus being kicking in danger.

it looked touched from where i was behind the goals.

I believe the kicking in danger "interpretation" was changed that their needed to be an intent to injure, which is impossible to pay anymore.

i'd say thats the case too, just a comment in jest to make light of the issue.

go saints

[Enrico_Misso]

So if we had lost by 2 points are we just expected to cop it?

There is an excellent case that the Hawkins goal cost us a Premiership.
When is the AFL going to do something about this.


Had we lost we are condemned to play each week and come up against Coll in the Prelim making the Premiership very very hard.
But with the win we should get a smooth ride into the GF.
THAT is how significant that blatant error could have been.

[plugger66]

So if we had lost by 2 points are we just expected to cop it?

There is an excellent case that the Hawkins goal cost us a Premiership.
When is the AFL going to do something about this.


Had we lost we are condemned to play each week and come up against Coll in the Prelim making the Premiership very very hard.
But with the win we should get a smooth ride into the GF.
THAT is how significant that blatant error could have been.

Sorry I thought we won.

[saintspremiers]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

If the ball is kicked with a hand on it , it should be paid a goal. I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

you never do Tugger.

You are the biggest AFL-lacky this site has ever seen....

Why because I dont care after winning. I think it is hilarous that anyone would care after one of our best wins ever. Hilarous.

You are the Hilarious one plugger.

So you don't give a stuff because we won?

What about if it happens in a GF AND we lose by under a goal?

Will you ever care, or will do you spend your whole life so far up the AFL's Jatz Cracker that you never see daylight???

[plugger66]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

If the ball is kicked with a hand on it , it should be paid a goal. I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

you never do Tugger.

You are the biggest AFL-lacky this site has ever seen....

Why because I dont care after winning. I think it is hilarous that anyone would care after one of our best wins ever. Hilarous.

You are the Hilarious one plugger.

So you don't give a stuff because we won?

What about if it happens in a GF AND we lose by under a goal?

Will you ever care, or will do you spend your whole life so far up the AFL's Jatz Cracker that you never see daylight???

And what should happen. Should we just whinge, why us or they are picking on us. I choose to go to the footy thinking everything is level and after tonight I am sure. They got a goal that didnt look like it was and we got a free after I thought we had lost. Swings and roundabouts unless of course you think the world is against us.

[saintspremiers]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

If the ball is kicked with a hand on it , it should be paid a goal. I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

you never do Tugger.

You are the biggest AFL-lacky this site has ever seen....

Why because I dont care after winning. I think it is hilarous that anyone would care after one of our best wins ever. Hilarous.

You are the Hilarious one plugger.

So you don't give a stuff because we won?

What about if it happens in a GF AND we lose by under a goal?

Will you ever care, or will do you spend your whole life so far up the AFL's Jatz Cracker that you never see daylight???

And what should happen. Should we just whinge, why us or they are picking on us. I choose to go to the footy thinking everything is level and after tonight I am sure. They got a goal that didnt look like it was and we got a free after I thought we had lost. Swings and roundabouts unless of course you think the world is against us.

Um, Mr Plugger, I actually posted a possible solution to this tripe if you bothered to read my other post about using technology.

[bigcarl]

Unless of course you think the world is against us.

Us against the world is a healthy attitude for the club and players this time of the year. It bonds us.

You are the odd man out

Tonight we are almost a united club.

[plugger66]

I thought it was a fair call. When hand/boot touch at the same time they generally go the way of the boot. Happened to us in prelim last year against the dogs and we got the better end of the stick... Go figure.

They are supposed to take the 'lesser' according to the rules.
Same applies for potential out on the full/boundry throw ins. If they are in doubt, the take the 'lesser' which would be a throw in, or in our case, the point.

If the ball is kicked with a hand on it , it should be paid a goal. I actually think Zac punched it threw but who cares.

you never do Tugger.

You are the biggest AFL-lacky this site has ever seen....

Why because I dont care after winning. I think it is hilarous that anyone would care after one of our best wins ever. Hilarous.

You are the Hilarious one plugger.

So you don't give a stuff because we won?

What about if it happens in a GF AND we lose by under a goal?

Will you ever care, or will do you spend your whole life so far up the AFL's Jatz Cracker that you never see daylight???

And what should happen. Should we just whinge, why us or they are picking on us. I choose to go to the footy thinking everything is level and after tonight I am sure. They got a goal that didnt look like it was and we got a free after I thought we had lost. Swings and roundabouts unless of course you think the world is against us.

Um, Mr Plugger, I actually posted a possible solution to this tripe if you bothered to read my other post about using technology.

Next season.

[skeptic]

cost us the momentum

the frustrating aspect of that decision was that I was on level EE on the wing and so that it was clearly off hands... how it can be missed is clearly beyond me

I know it's stupid but it almost makes me believe that the AFL are out to get us