-
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.
Round 22: The Chadstone car park games.
- Thread starter Redford
- Start date
Their late season form is reminiscent of ours in 2017. They’re a big chance to win it.
How good was the VAR technology on the goal line for the Sweden V Japan penalty shootout?
1mm clearance. Definitive.
AFL still rolling with Commodore 64 technology. The 8 pixels on Marchbanks finger just leapt off the screen.
Was a farce in the Brisbane final and nothing has improved
Ump called touched so as you say the footage was insufficient to over rule. The system actually worked. Just a pity it doesn’t always work like that including in finals…!
Last edited:
Can't say I've ever watched soccer to see what they use.
I was talking to some guys who were running the decision review technology at the first Ashes test, run by an Aussie company. They told me stuff like hot spot and the tennis tracking thing don't work with AFL because the area is too big for the cameras to cover. They said it would need to be done by getting something into the ball which would track it. Is that what soccer does?
Correct that's what he called but he guessed, marchbank didn't touch it. It should've been called a goal and then look to see if it was touched which replay shows it wasn't
This is the other stupidity in our game. If the goal ump called touched then speak out on who touched it.
You didn't just say that how many times umpires are right there and still miss it. Like last night Cameron marks clearly over the boundary line umps miss it. Also, close plays on behind the line and handballs to Cameron who goals, 3 umps all miss it.
He didn't even know he just saw hands everywhere and assumed it was touched, countless replays and no finger bends. Many times on replays we do see the finger bend and we acknowledge it.
The same distance away as when they say it wasnt touched,
Then ARC does finger bendy cam frame by frame 20 times, and you see bendy fingers,
So they call it a point.
But this ump thought it was touched, but finger bendy cam, no frame by frame to speak of, just rolled it on slo mo, no bendy fingers discernable,
No evidence.
It isnt consistent BR, like everything AFL.
The only thing they do consistently,
Is inconsistency
Looked like his fingers moved to me but regardless I don't see how anyone could look at those replays and say definitely it was touched or wasn't.
So then you go back to the umpire's call that he thought touched. I don't know how else you can do it with the current system.
The system should be the umpire calls touched, signals and they kick it in. No replays ever. Unfortunately the footy world isn't grown up enough to accept umpire's decisions without throwing tantrums when they are wrong.
Yeah Fingy cam is pretty subjective
I agree - *smile* the ARC off and let umps call it.
Or *smile* umps off and the *smile* in the ARC and let robots call it, like tennis
Its nonsensical; a system to make things clear and certain and remove controversy
That makes things less clear and more uncertain and more controversial
