Hopefully Ken will get offered a tour of the ARC facility to put his mind at restEven when they’re wrong they’re right….View attachment 18813
Does not matter in the end with them as they won - unlike our crap decisionHopefully Ken will get offered a tour of the ARC facility to put his mind at rest
The ball was clearly touched. It deviates. Cannot understand how anyone who watches the footage can say it was not touched.Even when they’re wrong they’re right….View attachment 18813
In breaking news the AFL, having just decided to spend over $1million to find an Xavier College Old Boy in a room next to Gill, have decided to invest in proper goal line technology.
"This will be a game changer", said Dan Richardson, head of umpiring. "Never again will we need to resort to broadcast quality footage in order to go with the umpires call."
Richardson then went on to display a sepia image of the new cameras that will be installed first at the MCG, then in subsequent decades at some other grounds.
View attachment 19105
Yep I reckon it was probably the right call yesterday. There was insufficient evidence to overrule. Partly because of the inadequate technology. Or the apprehension of the operator to get out his protractor and formulae to identify momentum deviation of the conveyance. It sucks being on both ends of the rule. Makes last year’s decision even more obviously wrong. We’re still waiting for that irrefutable evidence.Ironically that camera would have 8" x 10" film so the resolution would be a whole lot better than the crap the AFL currently use.
That decision today, I think it was Mansell poking his foot out for a goal, shows what a pathetic excuse for technology the AFL have. You could understand the goal umpire being unsure, I didn't see exactly where the goal ump was but it would have been very difficult in real time to see that one even if he was in a perfect position which would have been hard with all the players around. But the ARC should have been able to definitively see what happened, problem is they don't have the technology installed to do a proper job. It really is that simple, get the technology, it is out there, it is available, but the AFL won't get it.
The decision today was that they didn't have enough evidence to over-rule, yeah, like you did have enough evidence to over-rule that one in the Elimination Final last year?
So, therein lies another problem, gross incompetence. I agree there was not enough evidence to over-rule today because they don't have the right technology, but they didn't have enough evidence last September either, and they did over-rule. Just incompetent all round.
DS
No it wasn't. If you look at Mansells reaction he clearly thought it was a goal. That should be enough to overturn the decision.Yep I reckon it was probably the right call yesterday.
He was vibrant.No it wasn't. If you look at Mansells reaction he clearly thought it was a goal. That should be enough to overturn the decision.
50m penalty against you for dissent. Payable next gameNo it wasn't. If you look at Mansells reaction he clearly thought it was a goal. That should be enough to overturn the decision.
It’s the easy option now instead the goal umpire backing themselves.Goal ump in todays Pies Swans needed the arc 5 times
Does specsavers sponsor umps? He definitely needs a consultation
No it wasn't. If you look at Mansell's reaction he clearly thought it was a goal. That should be enough to overturn the decision.
I wished Dylan asked him what did the afl review with Richmond that made us drop talking about it.Still not over it.
Neither is Dimma either as referenced in the podcast.
What will they shaft us with this week?