Round 22: The Chadstone car park games.

[eZyT]

Exactly. And the 'scientific' reasoning happened in a fraction of the time that these decisions normally take. It felt like a couple of seconds. The 'science' also doesn't fit with the other crowd footage.

I'm super concerned betting has a hold of some of our umpires and decision makers. The grey areas make it super exploitable. When you listen to the podcasts about the NBA ref who did exactly this - it was all about under/overs and calls down the stretch to move a margin from 10 points to 5 points etc on an 8.5 point line. Block/charge. Hands foul/no call very easily called differently against both teams. Brisbane was I think -3.5 points at the line in that game or something similar. A Richmond goal put that bet out of the money. Lines probably have a ~5-10% profit margin so if you can shift the result in a way that flips that percentage you are on a winner.

100% agree RE and have been saying for years;

The more betting $$$, the more subjective the adjudications affecting the outcome,

The more corrupt it will be.

Its a matter if time until we have a major match fixing scandal

That is beyond suppression; that cant be 'ticked off'

 

[TigerForce]

Dorks beat the Dogs. They'll surpass us next season for sure.

 

[Dustintime]

Cutting deep and rebuilding like hawthorn doesnt look so bad all of a sudden

 

[The Big Richo]

The footage is the same

The footage isn't the same, I can confirm that first hand.

Even if you don't believe me, it's been confirmed on broadcasts many times.

 

[tigersnake]

The footage isn't the same, I can confirm that first hand.

Even if you don't believe me, it's been confirmed on broadcasts many times.

You're in the ARC?

I've never seen it convincingly argued let alone "confirmed". I've heard plenty of commentators say to a fellow commentator "are they seeing the same footage?" to which they generally respong "yes" or "I believe so".

Even if you're correct, which I don't think you are, there is no rational reason as to why they would do that. None. Zero. There are plenty of times when that AFL hasn't let that get in the way of providing an unconvincing cobbled together explanation, but even that hasn't happened.

 

[eZyT]

The footage isn't the same, I can confirm that first hand.

Even if you don't believe me, it's been confirmed on broadcasts many times.

That in itself is instructive

Two experienced footy minds certain of diametrically opposed facts.

1. Arc and veiwer see same footage
2. Arc and viewer see different footage.

Isnt that an astoundingly easy and foundational thing for The AFL to establish with a statement when the ARC is introduced

IF they wish to be transparent and fair?

There is a fairly big body of evidence that they place the footy fan low on the hierarchy of needs

And that they prioritise the retention of power through corrupt manipulation, conflation and opacity.

Its either that, or they have a marsupial mole in charge of communication?

 

[tigersnake]

That in itself is instructive

Two experienced footy minds certain of diametrically opposed facts.

1. Arc and veiwer see same footage
2. Arc and viewer see different footage.

Isnt that an astoundingly easy and foundational thing for The AFL to establish with a statement when the ARC is introduced

IF they wish to be transparent and fair?

There is a fairly big body of evidence that they place the footy fan low on the hierarchy of needs

And that they prioritise the retention of power through corrupt manipulation, conflation and opacity.

Yeah after the EF Lynch non-goal fiasco last year the AFL refused to make any statement or answer any questions re same footage V different footage. There were endless discussions by the footy media re 'apparently they have footage we don't see". Jason Dunstall from memory said a) just tell us, and b) if they see different footage that is ludicrous. Instead of just clearing it up, they undertook an obvious to anyone with a brain water-muddying campaign via "sources".

 

[eZyT]

there is no rational reason as to why they would do that. None. Zero.

Yes, we can rule out incompetance,

Which leaves only corruption

 

[eZyT]

Yeah after the EF Lynch non-goal fiasco last year the AFL refused to make any statement or answer any questions re same footage V different footage. There were endless discussions by the footy media re 'apparently they have footage we don't see". Jason Dunstall from memory said a) just tell us, and b) if they see different footage that is ludicrous. Instead of just clearing it up, they undertook an obvious to anyone with a brain water-muddying campaign via "sources".

Yes,

Teased apart and interogated, taken in isolation or in a wider context

Corruption is the only conclusion a reasonable minded person can draw IMHO

The AFL is corrupt; taking money off bookies and broadcasters and drawing exorbitant secret salaries

If they could, theyde station armed guards shouldering the Wagner insignia each side of the front door

 

[MD Jazz]

Yeah after the EF Lynch non-goal fiasco last year the AFL refused to make any statement or answer any questions re same footage V different footage. There were endless discussions by the footy media re 'apparently they have footage we don't see". Jason Dunstall from memory said a) just tell us, and b) if they see different footage that is ludicrous. Instead of just clearing it up, they undertook an obvious to anyone with a brain water-muddying campaign via "sources".

They knew it would be yesterdays F&C wrappers within a week. Say nothing and it will die a silent death.

They rely on a completely controlled and conflicted media. No one holds them accountable.

 

[MD Jazz]

Actualy the media is not conflicted at all. They are on the gravy train.

 

[Ridley]

But they explained it to Dimma who explained it to us and talked us through it and.....oh *smile* that didn't happen did it?

A cynical person might think that maybe the only conversation Dimma had with the AFL at that time was about coaching the Suns in 2024? He was furious about the ARC overturn but then he had his meeting with them and we basically got no explanation on why the decision was made.

"Listen Dimma; we know we *smile* you over but don't worry about that. We've got a nice cushy AFL funded job on the Gold Coast coming up in 2024. Interested? You're just about done at the Tiger's aren't ya? Nice fresh start for you and the new missus?" Whaddya reckon?"

It has emerged in the past few months that Dimma has told a few porkies...........

 

[TigerForce]

A cynical person might think that maybe the only conversation Dimma had with the AFL at that time was about coaching the Suns in 2024? He was furious about the ARC overturn but then he had his meeting with them and we basically got no explanation on why the decision was made.

"Listen Dimma; we know we *smile* you over but don't worry about that. We've got a nice cushy AFL funded job on the Gold Coast coming up in 2024. Interested? You're just about done at the Tiger's aren't ya? Nice fresh start for you and the new missus?" Whaddya reckon?"

It has emerged in the past few months that Dimma has told a few porkies...........

Exactly what I thought Riddles.

 

[tigersnake]

A cynical person might think that maybe the only conversation Dimma had with the AFL at that time was about coaching the Suns in 2024? He was furious about the ARC overturn but then he had his meeting with them and we basically got no explanation on why the decision was made.

"Listen Dimma; we know we *smile* you over but don't worry about that. We've got a nice cushy AFL funded job on the Gold Coast coming up in 2024. Interested? You're just about done at the Tiger's aren't ya? Nice fresh start for you and the new missus?" Whaddya reckon?"

It has emerged in the past few months that Dimma has told a few porkies...........

I posted at the time, I reckon Dimma fronted up to a meeting with AFL honchos, or maybe just a phonecall, they said 'look, we don't have any extra footage, the whole thing was half-arsed. Either you just forget it ever happened and move on, or we go to war over it and you just look like a whinger to all non-richmond supporters, we make your life less easy, etc etc...''

It was obvious that Dimma was publicly wanted an explanation, then suddenly he just stopped mentioning it.

You could call that a conspiracy, but I wouldn't, I'd just call it pretty standard dirty corporate politics.

 

[The Big Richo]

You're in the ARC?

I've never seen it convincingly argued let alone "confirmed". I've heard plenty of commentators say to a fellow commentator "are they seeing the same footage?" to which they generally respong "yes" or "I believe so".

Even if you're correct, which I don't think you are, there is no rational reason as to why they would do that. None. Zero. There are plenty of times when that AFL hasn't let that get in the way of providing an unconvincing cobbled together explanation, but even that hasn't happened.

I've seen the system as it is the same as the bench set up you have to review concussion incidents. (Edit: I haven't seen this since 2020 but assuming nothing has changed).

I'll explain it clearly because there is always someone who gets pedantic trying to play the man and not the ball when this comes up.

It is the same footage from the same cameras but the ARC chooses which footage they look at and channel 7 or Foxtel choose what footage they want to put on air. The TV doesn't know what the ARC is looking at so they can't mirror the same footage they can only guess. Most times they get it right because there are certain obvious angles but in some instances the ARC is looking at something else and TV don't find it until later.

It's different from cricket where the third umpire is wired to the director and actually asks them to choose the replays so you see it on your screen as they do. In the ARC the ARCer? has a screen with every bit of footage and they can self select and run it back and forth and slow mo etc

If you are motivated enough you could have a look at this game where I pointed it out last year:

Just confirmed by commentator in Bris v St Kilda game that we don't see what the ARC are looking at.

From memory this is a good one because the commentators are looking at it and actually saying they need a goal line angle to see if the player touched it before the line or not. Then just after the ARC decision comes through channel 7 finally bring up the one they needed to confirm it was before the line (whether it actually was touched or not is another matter, it was a bit like the Melb v Carlton one the other night!).

 

[jb03]

The footage isn't the same, I can confirm that first hand.

Even if you don't believe me, it's been confirmed on broadcasts many times.

IF you buy that spin then you are even dumber than your umpire supporting posting indicates.

 

[The Big Richo]

IF you buy that spin then you are even dumber than your umpire supporting posting indicates.

I'm dumb am I?

Dumber than than moron who is potting me when I have just explained how the system works with first hand knowledge and shared an example that confirms it?

Seriously mate, get yourself some help. And a mirror.

 

[The Big Richo]

They use a round ball.

And a rectangular field.

Sounds absolutely awful.

 

[MD Jazz]

I'm dumb am I?

Dumber than than moron who is potting me when I have just explained how the system works with first hand knowledge and shared an example that confirms it?

Seriously mate, get yourself some help. And a mirror.

(Edit: I haven't seen this since 2020 but assuming nothing has changed).

This is your MO. Claim some some sort of first hand or inside knowledge but also have an escape clause like the above. And supported by a smugness that is scarcely deserved.

One has to assume you were a crap masseuse because you certainly love rubbing people up the wrong way.

 

[MD Jazz]

And ultimate;ly, if it was so simple that there was footage that supported that fARCed decision why wasn't it simply released with a brief explanation of how the fARChead came to overrule the onfield call?

It wasn't released because it doesn't exist. And the media dropped it faster than Bairstow drops a pie floater.