AFL flags score review 'bunker'

[tigermike]

"Hocking flagged the AFL are looking into a bunker-like set-up for score reviews where all matches would be reviewed from one location, instead of at the grounds that is currently the case."
https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-06-08/afl-flags-score-review-bunker-after-third-error-in-two-weeks

A few questions/comments...
Do all grounds currently have the same no. of cameras in the same positions to properly judge all score reviews - for touched off the boot/touched on the line and hitting the post or the padding? This is critical for a fair competition.

Are there really enough cameras currently in use to make those reviews?

Do they provide a sharp enough image to make a call? Some images in the past have been too blurry to make a call.

If they want a central bunker then they will need enough people in there and enough monitors to assess every review immediately.

Who decides if a score is to be reviewed or not?

There must be better procedures set up to avoid the ball being run back to the centre when a review is underway.

I'm thinking that these requirements are just another indication that perhaps we have too many matches every week and too many grounds are being used because we have too many teams in our comp! Two less teams would be better but that is a different topic for discussion.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Sounds like Gil is preparing to take his own life, like Adolf...

Would be content if he simply stepped aside.

 

[TigerForce]

Follow the NFL style and get it right!!

We also need to stop making the goal umpire move and stand like a zombie. He needs to be more flexible by virtually 'getting into the play' and moving around the goals more (i.e. follow the ball on where it's going when flying towards the goals just like any player does)

 

[22nd Man]

Sounds like Gil is preparing to take his own life, like Adolf...

Would be content if he simply stepped aside.

Hopefully we see his Downfall soon.
Just on Gill....he looks like an undertaker at every recent public sighting eg Walk to G on Dreamtime .... Seemed to be dreaming of his n X T polo pony.

 

[artball]

"bunker-like set-up" ? ground breaking! .. what a moron ..

 

[btoz_01]

Just trying to copy the NRL bunker review
AFL needs to take ownership and look after score reviews not reliant on tv stations to provide cameras

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Hocking: “Gil, players are imperilling their health and futures via reckless gambling!”

Gil: “No worries, we will build our own casino. Two zeroes on the roulette wheel should teach them.”

 

[123cups]

At the end of the day, they either need to invest in the technology required or stop reviewing and go back to umpire's calls.

Why?

With a correct system, there’s less errors than no system. That’s a fact.

Just because it could be better doesn’t mean it should be scrapped.

Wait, wait, wait... let me guess - the AFL talk shows are all complaining about this issue right now and demand something be done about it, like the rules this time last year?

And the public nod along without thinking?

Yeah... I literally just watch football and check out comments on here. This crazy collective narrative can only be the work of the whinging AFL media.

Score review is miles better than no score review, it’s common sense.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Score review is miles better than no score review, it’s common sense.

The question is, why is it failing on occasion?

The AFL has so far not explained this to its patrons. This lack of transparency and accountability leads to calls for drastic action.

Constructing new review rooms will not fix anything on its own.

There seem to be human factors at play. Is it lack of training? Lack of intelligence? Lack of ability to follow procedure? Cheating?

 

[123cups]

The question is, why is it failing on occasion?

The AFL has so far not explained this to its patrons. This lack of transparency and accountability leads to calls for drastic action.

Constructing new review rooms will not fix anything on its own.

It doesn’t work 100% of the time because the camera upgrade would be expensive, it’s a simple issue; a money issue.

Talk of a central review room is merely a diversionary tactic to put off paying up for the cameras required to increase efficiency.

Gil placates the AFL bubble with window dressing all the time.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

It doesn’t work 100% of the time because the camera upgrade would be expensive, it’s a simple issue; a money issue. Talk of a central review room is merely a diversionary tactic to put off paying up for the cameras required to increase efficiency.

What I read into it is that they don't have enough skilled reviewers. It appears to be a "one source of truth" approach, similar to the streamlining of the MRO process.

 

[123cups]

What I read into it is that they don't have enough skilled reviewers. It appears to be a "one source of truth" approach, similar to the streamlining of the MRO process.

Lol that’s why I don’t consume any AFL media whatsoever. Skilled reviewers..? :hihi

They’re just holding off on making the expensive but inevitable technological upgrade required.

 

[joegarra]

I would like the answers (if anyone knows)
1, How many mistakes were there before goal reviews?
2. How many errors are there now?

 

[easy_tiger]

I would like the answers (if anyone knows)
1, How many mistakes were there before goal reviews?
2. How many errors are there now?

It was extremely rare that goal umps got it wrong.

and on the rare occasions they did, we didn't even know.

*smile* the techno sh!t off

the upside I see with a central bunker though,

is if you get robbed of a prelim final with a farcical decision,

you have somewhere to storm and sack?

 

[Mr Brightside]

Was Higgins goal/ point obvious on the TV ? On the screens at the ground it appeared to be across the line, I just thought it must have been my eyes been a bit blurry due to the moon glare

 

[TigerForce]

Was Higgins goal/ point obvious on the TV ? On the screens at the ground it appeared to be across the line, I just thought it must have been my eyes been a bit blurry due to the moon glare

Front on, it shows the ball behind the goal line as Taylor hangs back touching it. Definite goal.

 

[Bill James]

Front on, it shows the ball behind the goal line as Taylor hangs back touching it. Definite goal.

The goal umpire didn't say it was touched he said it hit the padding of the post. There is no way you can say it didn't hit the post from any of the replays.

 

[TigerForce]

The goal umpire didn't say it was touched he said it hit the padding of the post. There is no way you can say it didn't hit the post from any of the replays.

I didn't hear that and I'm going by where Taylor is. From 1:10 the ball is clearly behind the padding and a foot behind the goal line. No Geelong players disputed it anyway, so it should be goal. Other thing is, if the padding is behind the goal line, then it is not the post and should be a goal.

 

[YinnarTiger]

The fact is that the technology required to consistently and accurately override a human goal umpire's eyes and decision making does not yet exist. Until it does all goal review technology needs to be ditched and all goal umpires' decisions are final.

 

[BrisTiger24]

Was Higgins goal/ point obvious on the TV ? On the screens at the ground it appeared to be across the line, I just thought it must have been my eyes been a bit blurry due to the moon glare

I was watching the game at a pub without sound so couldnt hear what was being said. But to me, looking at it without commentary, it was a clear goal. I then got nervous when they kept looking at it. I wasn't aware that the goal umpire called a point but, even so, there was enough clear evidence to support the goal, it was blatantly obvious.