Adrian Anderson

[ucanchoose 1,816]

On Triple M, he just admitted that the umpire uniform choice was a mistake but once started couldn't do anything about it

Although a huge stuff-up, it's good to see him on the front foot in the morning admitting a stuff up

Also said that goal umpiring decisions were correct. After discussions with all umpires if there is any doubt the smaller score shall be registered

Edited May 8, 2010 by ucanchoose

[Jaded No More 68,088]

Did he clarify whether we asked the AFL mid-week to change the uniform and had our request denied?

Or perhaps why a multimillion dollar national organisation is capable of making such glaring mistakes?

No, I'm still not over it!

[ucanchoose 1,816]

Did he clarify whether we asked the AFL mid-week to change the uniform and had our request denied?

Or perhaps why a multimillion dollar national organisation is capable of making such glaring mistakes?

No, I'm still not over it!

No he didn't, but it was a unique set of circumstances because of the pink

Will never happen again

[Eth 4]

Also said that goal umpiring decisions were correct. After discussions with all umpires if there is any doubt the smaller score shall be registered

What doubt? The goal umpire was signalling a goal.

Non-goal of the year goes to Brad Green.

[ucanchoose 1,816]

What doubt? The goal umpire was signalling a goal.

Non-goal of the year goes to Brad Green.

They introduced a system a few years ago of consultation between all umpires involved, not just the goal umpire

[Sir Why You Little 36,695]

On Triple M, he just admitted that the umpire uniform choice was a mistake but once started couldn't do anything about it

Although a huge stuff-up, it's good to see him on the front foot in the morning admitting a stuff up

Also said that goal umpiring decisions were correct. After discussions with all umpires if there is any doubt the smaller score shall be registered

Too little too late Anderson. Thanks for stuffing up my week

APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED. How dare umpires wear Red & Blue anyway!

[censored]

[titan_uranus 24,752]

Also said that goal umpiring decisions were correct. After discussions with all umpires if there is any doubt the smaller score shall be registered

I've never heard of that before.

I'm sure there have been plenty of instances where there's been doubt over a goal but it's been paid nonetheless.

Goal umpires have no power in the game anymore. They are umpires for a reason. Either turn them into 'goalmen' or let them decide. Like I said in the other thread, if there's doubt on a field umpire's decision you don't get umpires rushing in from everywhere to have their say.

[Daz's Dee's 113]

Time for the 3rd umpire decisions i think. what if that was a Final or heavin forbid a Grand Final. Some people will disagree i'm sure. If a decision cant be made than go the lesser score or throw it back too the GOAL umpire.

Edited May 8, 2010 by Daz's Dee's

[Mono 455]

If a boundary or field umpire are sure a ball was touched, I would have thought they were duty bound to inform the goal umpire.

If the boot was on the other foot, I know I'd want them to.

[southparkboy 0]

Sorry doesnt = 4 points

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Too little too late Anderson. Thanks for stuffing up my week

APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED. How dare umpires wear Red & Blue anyway!

[censored]

Grow up.

I've never heard of that before.

I'm sure there have been plenty of instances where there's been doubt over a goal but it's been paid nonetheless.

Goal umpires have no power in the game anymore. They are umpires for a reason. Either turn them into 'goalmen' or let them decide. Like I said in the other thread, if there's doubt on a field umpire's decision you don't get umpires rushing in from everywhere to have their say.

3aw footy mentioned it came in a couple of years.

FFS, the goal umpire never indicates until he has all clear from the field umpire. What does that tell you? Hmmmmm

[Sir Why You Little 36,695]

Grow up.

Why should we always do as you want RR? Anderson is a [censored]-That decision should never have been allowed.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Why should we always do as you want RR? Anderson is a [censored]-That decision should never have been allowed.

Well it did - it happened- They admitted their error(You should take note)- Get over it.

It should not be allowed to happen again. Hopefully a lesson has been learnt by the AFL.

[Jaded No More 68,088]

FFS, the goal umpire never indicates until he has all clear from the field umpire. What does that tell you? Hmmmmm

But why does someone 30m away get to have more of say in this situation than the man who is paid to stand right there and call the shots?

The goal umpire thought it was a goal and he was closest to the action by an absolute mile.

Words really do fail me in regards to this game.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

But why does someone 30m away get to have more of say in this situation than the man who is paid to stand right there and call the shots?

The goal umpire thought it was a goal and he was closest to the action by an absolute mile.

Words really do fail me in regards to this game.

Being closest does not mean you are always in the best position to see the incident. There have been a number of occassions where a field umpire has consulted with a goal umpire on an outcome.

[Sir Why You Little 36,695]

Well it did - it happened- They admitted their error(You should take note)- Get over it.

It should not be allowed to happen again. Hopefully a lesson has been learnt by the AFL.

It would have been far easier to learn the lesson during the week. They wore Blue shorts FFS. You can be all smarmy if you like but i am Furious that was allowed. Particulairly with the weather.

I hope the Club say some things. Their are other clubs in Victoria who certainly would not let it lie.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

It would have been far easier to learn the lesson during the week. They wore Blue shorts FFS. You can be all smarmy if you like but i am Furious that was allowed. Particulairly with the weather.

I hope the Club say some things. Their are other clubs in Victoria who certainly would not let it lie.

Enjoy your stuffed week. I have explained the situation. You cant change history. Move on. Your hissy fit is self serving.

[heartbeatstrue 57]

Also said that goal umpiring decisions were correct. After discussions with all umpires if there is any doubt the smaller score shall be registered

Well he would say that wouldn't he.

Where did the doubt come from? In the Dunny case, it was Lake and the boundary umpire in the goal umpire's face arguing vociferously that it was touched, when the goal umpire who was in best position and whose first instinct was that it was a clean goal had already made his decision. The goal umpire wasn't asking for help or advice (watch the replay).

So if Anderson says that's the correct way to play AFL, we should coach all our back players on the best bullying psychology to create doubt in as many opposition goals as possible, to get them downgraded to behinds? I think not.

[Sir Why You Little 36,695]

Enjoy your stuffed week. I have explained the situation. You cant change history. Move on. Your hissy fit is self serving.

You have explained the situation! Oh well that is the way it has to be then RR. Geez you are a classic sometimes.

Talk about self serving!!!!

[heartbeatstrue 57]

I'm sure there have been plenty of instances where there's been doubt over a goal but it's been paid nonetheless.

Remember the Tom Hawkins 'goal' in the GF? There should have been plenty of doubt over that...

[heartbeatstrue 57]

3aw footy mentioned it came in a couple of years.

FFS, the goal umpire never indicates until he has all clear from the field umpire. What does that tell you? Hmmmmm

I wonder what the (relatively new) rule actually says?

The OP says Anderson said "After discussions with all umpires if there is any doubt the smaller score shall be registered". Obviously "all umpires" don't consult after every goal. So what constitutes "any doubt"? In the two instances last night, it was a field umpire who expressed doubt on the first one. I'm not surprised, watching the replay if I was where the field umpire was, I would have had doubt. But in that case, the goal umpire was best placed to know what really happened in that split second. Did the Bulldogs player punch the ball, or was it cleanly off Green's boot? Any sound and first instinct are also pretty good evidence for the goal umpire.

I guess I'm saying, yes doubt would exist in some of the umpire's minds but should that be sufficient on Anderson's words to have the lower score registered?

In the second case, Dunny's point, after watching the replay it's Lake's demonstrative arguing with the goal umpire that I think was unacceptable. Obviously the doubt should come from reasonably-sighted umpires (maybe the boundary ump was, but again from the replay it's hard to see that he could have had doubts based on evidence - more like doubts based on lack of certainty if that's the right words). Players should be instructed to keep out of umpire's faces (especially if this "any doubt, smaller score" rule is like Anderson suggests). Players shouldn't be able to be involved in adding to that doubt.

Maybe penalise blatant attempts by players to pressure goal umpires by allowing the greater score to stand regardless? Dunno.

By far the worst mistake was the umpire's uniforms. And that should have been foreseen by the powers that be before the game. It wasn't a split-second mistake or bad decision made under pressure.

[titan_uranus 24,752]

FFS, the goal umpire never indicates until he has all clear from the field umpire. What does that tell you? Hmmmmm

The point of the all clear is to indicate to the goal umpire that the passage of play was OK, that there wasn't a free kick or any reason for the ball not to have crossed the goal line, allowing the goal umpire to signal whether the score registered a goal or a behind.

This does not, and should not, preclude the goal umpire from making his/her decision as to whether or not the score was a goal or a behind. Having field umpires questioning them, especially when the goal umpire was in a better position, undermines their role and makes them second-guess themselves. Let them make the decisions.

[45HG 1,539]

If it's a point, the field umpire signals all clear with one hand.

If it's a goal, the field umpire signals all clear with two. Not sure how much power you can say that goal umpires have except to judge if the ball goes through the sticks - and on occasion if it's touched on the line.

Mickrocks will be able to shed some light on all of this.

Edited May 8, 2010 by 45HG16

[TrueGRITS 0]

It's not like Lake didn't try the exact same thing at the other end when he started celebrating the goal when he kicked a point... he was trying to fool the umpire

[titan_uranus 24,752]

If it's a point, the field umpire signals all clear with one hand.

If it's a goal, the field umpire signals all clear with two. Not sure how much power you can say that goal umpires have except to judge if the ball goes through the sticks - and on occasion if it's touched on the line.

That's for the obvious ones, yes. But when there's doubt, the decision always seems to rest with the field umpire, even if the goal umpire was adamant or was in the better position. That's not how it should be.