Yeah, but what I don't get is why he called it as hitting the post with no evidence that it had hit the post.
Also, the ARC should have been able to clear up any confusion, clearly did not do its job.
DS
Ball went through very close to the post, with a noisy crowd cheering. Umpire wouldn't be able to hear the ball snick the post so has to go on visual.
Obviously the ball didn't smack full on into the post or everyone would have noticed.
Umpire gets two options to choose from...................................
1. He thinks it may just have brushed the post, so it's a behind.
2. He thinks it may just have missed the post so it's a goal.
Umpire by process of elimination has decided it may just have brushed the post so calls it as such but asks for a review to ensure he hasn't stuffed up. Goal review footage being cheap n nasty is of insufficient quality for the reviewing officer to over ride the initial call. Goal umpire doesn't get to sit down with a brief of evidence n ten minutes of slo mo footage to make his initial call from, he's got to go with what he believes he has seen happen. The review couldn't decide whether the ball hit or not, that's how close it was so the umpires initial call had to stand.
