-
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.
ARC Appeal
- Thread starter snags
- Start date
The decision was wrong. No assumption required. The issue at hand, however, is that the AFL required someone to make an adjudication with sub standard data. That same sub standard data will likely be utilised again this season by another nuffie who at some stage will determine the outcome of a game based on a guess at best. It is wrong for the AFL to assume that it is good enough.
Only AFL apologists and those with a vested interest in the AFL apparatchik see nothing of concern with the ARC.
That's an emotional response though, the facts are the AFL has said the decision was correct and our coach has been through the ARC, had the decision explained to him and not come out and said anything different.
There's no basis to assume the decision was wrong (or right) based on anything we have seen or heard.
we have been here before
This is the footage that proves it but you just refuse to accept it. It cannot be anything but a goal
It's not about refusing to accept it, that just isn't anywhere near conclusive proof of anything.
It's a grainy mobile phone video from 70 metres away on an angle and the ball appears to go awfully close to the post.
Again, there's no way from that to say it's right or wrong with any certainty.
That means by definition you must agree that the final decision was wrong. Given the goal umpire signalled a goal then there must be conclusive evidence to over turn it.
The point I'm making is none of us actually know if it was correct or not. We can't say if it was correct or not because we haven't seen the evidence (or not).
Our coach has though and he isn't saying anything.
Sorry TBR, but the fact that Dimma has said nothing doesn't mean he's satisfied with the explanation. I believe that the club decided that there is nothing to gain from kicking up a further stink.
As for the comment about the YouTube footage, it looks better quality than the AFL's potato camera footage.
My view will always be that we got dudded on this one. AFL and their sicophants in the media circled the wagons and the caravan then moved on. Sigh.
I would say that is totally the way our club works now. Why would he say anything? There is nothing to be gained from it apart from being called whingers. There is also no gain in embarrassing the AFL
They aren’t going to change the decision and send us to the MCG next week to play the demons.
We have to accept the decision was made but that doesn’t mean I believe it was correct.
No however the protocol was that an umpires decision could only be overturned in light of conclusive evidence , you can’t fool anyone what was produced was conclusive meaning the umpire at the foot of the goal post was in most commanding position to call
This thread's gonna get to the 9/11 level.
Wonder if that's where the old saying of discretion being the better part of valour emanates from?
The AFL owns the comp, make the rules of the comp, adjudicate the comp, finance the comp, market the comp. Maybe sometimes the only choice ya get is to simply shut the *smile* up n do as you're told.
No, of course it doesn't mean he was satisfied and you may well be correct but it would be nice to know either way.
The fact the club hasn't followed this up with an explanation to the members is very poor, I think.
It all depends on what evidence was produced and that is the part we still don't know.
I don't think it is poor at all. Why would saying the decision is wrong benefit the members? There is a strong argument to say the opposite.
I take Dimma's silence in the exact opposite way to you. My view is that if he thought the decision was correct he would have said so and by saying nothing my strong suspicion is that is not the Club's view.
Dimma's silence means Part II starts this season. He'll open the case behind the scenes again I reckon.
Because I think if we have lost a final because an incorrect overruling of an umpire's decision then we are entitled to know that and what is going to be done to address it in future.
The club opened the door by questioning the decision after the game and in the media following. To then go and have a tour and not follow up by letting everyone know where it stands is not good enough.
It's not like they have to blow up the AFL, we saw the footage and don't agree it was sufficient to overrule if all they needed to say.
I am a member and I don't expect to hear from the club about it because I think it would be counter productive
Based on what we all saw, plus the rule that was in place concerning the clarity of evidence in favour.. before overturning a goal umpires ruling, and based upon Gills later statement about having to rely on the umpires SUBJECTIVE judgement (that the ball would have hit a goal post), it is clear that the reviewing umpire didn’t follow the AFL rules in place at the time.
It is worth remembering that to get us to that point cost a super human effort from all players and staff, plus their close relatives and friends.
It has also cost the club and it’s members.. what maybe around $100,000,000.
The club suffered a huge consequence and the matter is still to be properly explained, the reason being that the AFL
can’t explain or justify within the rules.
Every reason to remain angry.
Last edited:
