-
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.
Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!
- Thread starter iLoVeNeWmAn
- Start date
This is the image being used by the media to justify this decision
Roll back a frame:
When you look at the umpire position, it's clear the ball is directly above him and possibly slightly past him at this stage.
At a minimum, there is nowhere near enough evidence to overturn this decision. But i guess, if an umpire is abotu t oaward a 50m penalty after the siren ala the Sydney game, and someon upstairs can just over rule, then it just seems it's one rule for us, and another for everyone else.
For mine, the costly aspect of this game was the lack of holding the ball decisions going our way in the first half while Eric Hipwood went literally untouchable at the other end.
Even Mince on SEN now is saying the goal review system is flawed and that it couldn’t be overruled based on the vision provided.
Yeah but what the AFL is gonna say Drags, is that the decision was not overturned or overruled because the goal umpire never made a decision in the first place. He says to the field umpire he “thinks” it’s a goal but you better check. He doesn’t put 2 fingers up. He doesn’t wave flags. He asks for an ARC decision. And the ARC hands down it’s assessment. And that’s all she wrote…
Nothing definitive about this. The angle isn't front on like you'd need it to be to really tell. But even then it's unclear at what point the ball crosses the goal line. An absolute farce. AFL once again making themselves look amateur at best, corrupt at worse.
Who was the ARC wit that said it was definitively over the post? Outrageous.
Another example of anti-Richmond bias running throughout the entire AFL.
The ARC wit, clearly aware of the anti Richmond AFL narrative deliberately screwed us last night. No 2 ways about it.
The goal umpire had by far the best seat in the house called it a goal FFS !!!
Another example of anti-Richmond bias running throughout the entire AFL.
The ARC wit, clearly aware of the anti Richmond AFL narrative deliberately screwed us last night. No 2 ways about it.
The goal umpire had by far the best seat in the house called it a goal FFS !!!
Review ticked off by the AFL. Fair dinkum, they are like the Russian bureau of public info. Forget logic, process, competence, professionalism, nobody will notice. Pundits will comment and analyse it for what it is but neither they nor the punters will really care. Everyone hates Richmond anyway and they've already won 3, Lynch didn't celebrate.
This no-mans land between a bumbling, booze-soaked small-town boys club and an elite professional corporation drives me mental.
This no-mans land between a bumbling, booze-soaked small-town boys club and an elite professional corporation drives me mental.
yeah he was, said it at the ground and confirmed on replay. Its only a small thing, still should have kicked it anyway, but with 5 more degrees that he should have had it would have been all but a sure thing.
I’m convinced they just make this crap up on the run….. who is your reliable source Tom?
7NEWS Melbourne’s Tom Browne reported the AFL has ticked off the decision following a preliminary assessment of the review.
He also revealed review officials can take player reaction into account before proceeding to look at the evidence.
“The ARC reviewed all the camera angles and it’s viewed as a definitive behind, the correct call - in the AFL’s view - was made,” he said.
“I was told tonight from a reliable source that they do look at the player reaction as a guide and then look at the evidence.”
7NEWS Melbourne’s Tom Browne reported the AFL has ticked off the decision following a preliminary assessment of the review.
He also revealed review officials can take player reaction into account before proceeding to look at the evidence.
“The ARC reviewed all the camera angles and it’s viewed as a definitive behind, the correct call - in the AFL’s view - was made,” he said.
“I was told tonight from a reliable source that they do look at the player reaction as a guide and then look at the evidence.”
he ran way too far, but yes it was shock they paid it in that situation and didn't expect it in the least.
True, but when you look at the position of the goal umpire and where he is looking, it starts looking far more like the ball is well over the line and not over post high than otherwise.
It is pretty funny, to me at least, that every time bewildering ARC incompetence happens an alleged expert commentator will say "maybe they are looking at footage we don't see?". Every time. It was Dunstall last night.
A) even the so-called experts don't know what the process is and how it works, and B) Why would they use secret footage? It flies in the face of everything the ARC is meant to do and why it exists.
ARC stands for Anti Richmond Campaigner.
Its a Billion dollar industry and we have some *smile* behind a TV screen 5000km from the ground making a call to overturn a decision that the goal umpire was in best position to see.
Then to come out and say they can take Lynch's reaction into account. FMD! What sort of *smile* joke competition is this?
Its a Billion dollar industry and we have some *smile* behind a TV screen 5000km from the ground making a call to overturn a decision that the goal umpire was in best position to see.
Then to come out and say they can take Lynch's reaction into account. FMD! What sort of *smile* joke competition is this?
I'm not eve nsure Lynch was reacting to the trajectory of the ball. I had the impression he was questioning wy Andrews was charging forward of the mark as soon as he made the first of his delivery strides to kick. Although he went the banana, he didn't really step off his line at all.This is what's going to happen every time a player kicks at goal from now on:
