Umpire farce - Getting worse by the minute!

[KnightersRevenge]

Because he couldn't hear the flog due to loud crowd. Same with Cumbo later when he had to stand.

Nah, it's all on the players. The umps don't call advantage until a player actually takes the advantage. Bakes tried it on and buggered it up. Not the umps fault, that one. We got lucky a few times too. Cameron was definitely held on one of their missed goals. Could easily have been a shot from directly in front.

 

[tigersnake]

How was the 50 against Pickett tonight which gifted a goal to Sydney? Firstly if he was in the protected area he was only just, secondly, they haven't paid it since round 10 when they 'adjusted' it.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Because he couldn't hear the flog due to loud crowd. Same with Cumbo later when he had to stand.

Agreed on the Cumbo one.

 

[TigerForce]

Nah, it's all on the players. The umps don't call advantage until a player actually takes the advantage. Bakes tried it on and buggered it up. Not the umps fault, that one. We got lucky a few times too. Cameron was definitely held on one of their missed goals. Could easily have been a shot from directly in front.

Yeah it was a free, but shouldn't have been 50.

 

[DavidSSS]

View attachment 16588

Ball is clearly behind the post before going higher than the post. Pretty definitive really, physics tells us it is not possible that the ball would have hit a taller post if it hasn't even reached the top of post height until well after it has crossed the goal line.

A complete farce.

Carpet lifted and broom fetched, it's out of sight now, just the way the AFL likes it. Some may still excuse this but it is laughable how bad this decision is and anyone apologising for the AFL just shows their bias or lack of understanding of our game.

DS

 

[123cups]

If the AFL cannot produce conclusive evidence then the goal should stand and we win the game.

 

[daniel30]

Blind Freddy can see it's a certain goal what a farce of a organisation talk about incompetent we we're robbed.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1565574928673685504

 

[TigerMasochist]

Ball is clearly behind the post before going higher than the post. Pretty definitive really, physics tells us it is not possible that the ball would have hit a taller post if it hasn't even reached the top of post height until well after it has crossed the goal line.

Camera image from 150 metres away obviously cannot show depth perspective. The only view that would show whether the ball had passed behind the goal post before topping post height is the perfect view the goal umpire had standing at the base of the post. If the ARC doesn't have this camera view then they don'y have the capacity to over rule his decision n old mate Gilligan is full of *smile* declaring it a correct decision.

 

[MD Jazz]

As much as it hurts, I have to agree with TBR here. Ump didn't call advantage until Bakes took off. The decision to take the advantage rests with the players, the umps don't call it until a player forces them too by playing on. Bakes played on.

The thing is they often call advantage and then change the call when the player taking the advantage stops when there is no clear advantage. I assume that is called common sense umpiring.
But it’s not always applied.
And then the question is was Baker out of bounds early in the tackle?

 

[MD Jazz]

Grant Thomas has been hammering them on it on twitter. To paraphrase: "If the footage is decisive and you've ticked it off, show us the decisive bit?"

Simple question isn’t it?
Has anyone on Fox demanded it?

 

[Legends of 2017]

Simple question isn’t it?
Has anyone on Fox demanded it?

With the broadcasting rights currently up for grabs?

 

[Teckor]

If the AFL cannot produce conclusive evidence then the goal should stand and we win the game.

From what I can see the AFL has produced conclusive evidence with the 4 split screen score review that everyone saw - If looked at closely then the evidence is that it was in fact a goal.

In the 2 pictures below I freeze framed the vision of the ball crossing the goal line and then the next frame is past the goal line.

They appear to use camera's at 45 degree to the goal line on the left and right and 90 degree front and rear. The rear camera losses the ball due to the ball height so can be eliminated. I would also eliminate the right 45 degree camera due to where the kick was from.

Due to angles, time and distance perceptions on 2D images I imagine it would be best to use the 45 degree left camera for distance and time and the front on 90 degree for the direction of the ball.

The 1st picture shows the ball starting to cross the goal line - the left 45 degree angle camera (bottom left) shows that, while the front on 90 degree camera (bottom right) shows the ball clearly inside the goal post. i.e Goal

The 2nd picture clearly shows with the left 45 degree camera (bottom left) that ball is well past the goal line, while the 90 degree front on camera (bottom right) shows the ball starting to cross the top of the post but this is well after the ball has past the goal line so only a perception to the eye.

 

[TigerMasochist]

Bottom right image looks to me like the ball is definitely through behind the post not over the top of the post. Umpy's call stands for mine.

 

[tigertim]

Honestly, we,ll never know from the footage if the ball went over an imaginary line up from the goal post.

Now if only there was a role for an official to be on the goal line and adjudicate ....oh wait...

 

[Teckor]

Honestly, we,ll never know from the footage if the ball went over an imaginary line up from the goal post.

Now if only there was a role for an official to be on the goal line and adjudicate ....oh wait...

You would think thank a professional umpire standing at the line, looking up along side the post could tell if the ball went over the post or not...

Front on vision shows the ball went through inside of the goal post, not over, confirming the goal umpires on field call.

 

[TOT70]

You would think that the way the rule is written, the goal umpire can only be overruled if the mistake is a glaring one.

In this case, if it passed the goal post half a metre on the point side then it is an overrule. If it is a case of a couple of centimetres one way or the other, that is not enough to change the call.

 

[eddazol]

Once again the overruled goal shows how amateur the afl is.

 

[Tigers of Old]

The gaslighting & stubborn denial is what *smile* me most.

 

[CarnTheTiges]

Must make the goal umpire feel great knowing how head office are supporting his ability to make a decision. And they then have to invent reasons as to why people don’t want to umpire. It’s not about players on field throwing their arms out.

 

[Little Ziggyadee]

The gaslighting & stubborn denial is what *smile* me most.

The question is would the ARC over turned the decision by the goal umpire if Daniher was the kicker?
No fken chance