Goal Review Technology - Farce or not? | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Goal Review Technology - Farce or not?

What's your opinion on the AFL's goal review technology?

  • Total voters
    47
  • Poll closed .
Tigers of Old

Tigers of Old

Tiger Legend
Jul 26, 2004
80,294
45,488
www.redbubble.com
Not that it made a difference to the result but now the AFL admits Sloane's goal should have been paid.
I am not sure how they reached that conclusion definitively, perhaps media consensus?

Personally I think it's well time that the technology should be ditched completely.
It is poor technology and there are several decisions made by field and boundary umpires every game that are incorrect and put down to human error that escape video scrutiny. :p

Bachar's bumped ball out of bounds on the full a classic case of how umpires get things wrong, yet despite clear video evidence suggesting that the ball bounced, the Crow's player was still allowed to take his shot for goal which could have influenced the result.

I can't understand why they persist with it?

Ditch it altogether AFL.
 
Tigers of Old said:
Not that it made a difference to the result but now the AFL admits Sloane's goal should have been paid.
I am not sure how they reached that conclusion definitively, perhaps media consensus?

Personally I think it's well time that the technology should be ditched completely.
It is poor technology and there are several decisions made by field and boundary umpires every game that are incorrect and put down to human error that escape video scrutiny. :p

Bachar's bumped ball out of bounds on the full a classic case of how umpires get things wrong, yet despite clear video evidence suggesting that the ball bounced, the Crow's player was still allowed to take his shot for goal which could have influenced the result.

I can't understand why they persist with it?

Ditch it altogether AFL.
Click to expand...
Its a joke. Like cricket, they now go to it far too often. "oooo it went within a metre of the post, better check if it hit the post" then 9/10 it is inconclusive and is umpires call, what's the point!!
 
Only way i would be for it is if they install perfect technology like the tennis's 'hawk-eye'.
That being it works to the millimetre and removes all doubt, as well as being installed consistently in every AFL ground across Australia.
Then I might accept it. As it stands now it's a complete farce.
 
Fully agree.

And who's to say it didn't impact the result? Stirring win by the Tiges but if we'd needed two goals in those last four minutes, would we have got them? I know we did, but both sides would have played those minutes differently.

Having said that, you could also question whether or not Adelaide would have got the goal they did a minute or two after Sloane's.
 
Improve the technology.

Have the 3rd umpire review every goal and set it a max xxSecs (however long they wait for a commercial break) and if it isn't clearcut in that time, Umpires decision stands.

If while they are resetting the video ump spots a wrong decision, he can get into the Umps ear pieces tell ing the to go back for a point

The technology is available today to make it viable. Might as well use it. Beanie knows we'd be storming AFL house if we lost a grand final because the goal umpire stuffed up.
 
Tigers of Old said:
Why not if the field umpire stuffs up? Or are we just conditioned to accept that?
Click to expand...

I'd say there is a bit more tolerance for umpitres stuffing up. A lot more happening and it's very quick. The goal umpire is accountable for a lot less in terms of moving parts and should, by rights, get it right most of the time.

But as I said, if we're going to do it, do it properly with the correct technology.
 
It would be more accurate if they locked a family of capuchin monkeys in a room with cardboard cut outs of the team mascots and checked to see which one had more poop on it every time they needed to make an adjudication.
 
Was rushed in by The Giesch and it's still flawed. Creates as many problems as it solves. Nobody would've questioned the awarding of the goal if the review system didn't exist.

It would be tolerable - just - with a consistent implementation and better technology.
 
re: sloanes goal. if you watch the the ball it bounces to the right then deviates to the left off the post. the video ump got it right.
 
artball said:
re: sloanes goal. if you watch the the ball it bounces to the right then deviates to the left off the post. the video ump got it right.
Click to expand...
I actually thought so too.
But what was the goal umpires call?
If he said he thought it hit the post - then I agree the video confirmed it.
But if he said goal - then even though I reckon it did touch the post - I wouldn't have overruled it.
 
Baloo said:
Improve the technology.
Click to expand...
The capacity to improve the technology does not exist at present.

Ditch the review system until we have proof that we have technology that is better than the human eye.
 
YinnarTiger said:
The capacity to improve the technology does not exist at present.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. It's more a question if the AFL are prepared to pay for the right technology.
 
Why the AFL insist on using it with half arsed measures I don't know. Makes them look amateurish. Spend the dough and get it right.
 
Tenacious said:
I actually thought so too.
But what was the goal umpires call?
If he said he thought it hit the post - then I agree the video confirmed it.
But if he said goal - then even though I reckon it did touch the post - I wouldn't have overruled it.
Click to expand...
Yep, thought it probably hit the post but no way would l have overruled the goal umpire.
 
Very good thread ToO. I said OK, needs further improvement. Throughout this year we have seen some games with the goal umpires wearing the 'go-pro' cameras on their caps. WTF happened to them on Saturday night? If they were worn then the 'Sloan' controversy would not have occurred. There needs to be consistency and all goal umpires wearing them.
 
Probably the biggest issue to come out of this is that the decision went in our favour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< saturday fox footy central | George upgraded >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom