2 hours ago, YearOfTheDees said:

We have to stop blaming the Umps. The rules are confusing and players are smart enough to know how to exploit them. I would go as far as having a "spirt of the game law" where players can be fined or even miss games if found guilty of faking frees. Was so good to see Kossie put his hand up last year about the ball being touched after he kicked a goal. 

Not necessarily. As with track goal the Crows umpire made a fundamental mistake against the protocols he's trained for.

He said there was a deflection and thus a point.

He SHOULD have  called the point  as he has been trained to do then asked the arc to confirm the deflection.

Then he would reverse and call a goal.

Why he's been stood down. A Tracs score had no definitive evidence. But should have been called goal except umpire weakly fell for players call and called point first.

44 minutes ago, Demonland said:

This is certainly an interesting angle.

 

Keays' kick curled in late. It clearly missed the post.

12 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Not necessarily. As with track goal the Crows umpire made a fundamental mistake against the protocols he's trained for.

He said there was a deflection and thus a point.

He SHOULD have  called the point  as he has been trained to do then asked the arc to confirm the deflection.

Then he would reverse and call a goal.

Why he's been stood down. A Tracs score had no definitive evidence. But should have been called goal except umpire weakly fell for players call and called point first.

Not talking about the goal Ump that's an easy fix it's the players cheating on the field. You can call it game play but I'm calling it cheating and needs to be removed from the game.

don't forget, afl sells broadcast rights, broadcast provider (currently foxtel and ch7) pays for cameras and vision provision from external agency (nep)

from my understanding, the broadcasters only pay for hd quality cameras, not even 4k let alone 8k

afaik, it's never been mandated in the broadcast rights agreement the quality of cameras

i believe there's a minimum camera requirement at each game at a fully accredited venue (22, from memory?) but that c7 usually have more cameras active at all times

3 hours ago, YearOfTheDees said:

Not talking about the goal Ump that's an easy fix it's the players cheating on the field. You can call it game play but I'm calling it cheating and needs to be removed from the game.

Spot on. It's cheating and remind me never to use Caleb marchbank for a job referee by an applicant applying for a job with me. 

8 hours ago, loges said:

10 - 15 very generous 

I’m a very kind person 

Can someone please refresh my memory on how MFC were screwed in 1998 finals series after beating Crows by 10 goals in MCG final?

 

AFL later admitted they got our “seeding” wrong - MFC should’ve had easier opponent/no interstate travel or something. 
Couldn’t believe it at the time. 
Don’t feel sorry for Crows. 
 

Given Fox broadcasts in 4K and 7 in HD, the Fox goal cameras would have to be better?

Gerard Whateley was very strong on 360 tonight about the score review and ARC. 

Should it be called the ARC or the FarcE ?

Question if ever goal is reviewed upstairs during the ad break "60 sec" how did Jeremy Cameron goal not get over turned a few weeks back. The Out Of Bounds hand pass goal. 

20 hours ago, Demonland said:

This is certainly an interesting angle.

 

From that angle the ball either looks like it has clipped the post or ... because of the spinning motion of the hooked kick, it has hooked further just as it passes the post 

Much like a draw shot in golf (properly played) where the golf ball goes dead straight (or out to right) for x-amount of yardage then suddenly hooks to the left at the end of its trajectory (for a right handed golfer)

And with bodies jostling everywhere forcing the umpire to be moved out of position, I'm surprised that more aren't taking the umpires point of view

Edited August 23, 20231 yr by Macca

20 hours ago, YearOfTheDees said:

Not talking about the goal Ump that's an easy fix it's the players cheating on the field. You can call it game play but I'm calling it cheating and needs to be removed from the game.

It's human nature to advocate for point if you believe you got a hand on it, calling for it to be removed from the game only adds to the overwhelming complexity of how our game is adjudicated. 

Umpires should just be ignoring the players when they do it (which I'm sure they've already been instructed to do anyway). 

 

3 hours ago, Smokey said:

It's human nature to advocate for point if you believe you got a hand on it, calling for it to be removed from the game only adds to the overwhelming complexity of how our game is adjudicated. 

Umpires should just be ignoring the players when they do it (which I'm sure they've already been instructed to do anyway). 

 

It's cheating you can call it anything you want but it's still cheating. 

 

6 hours ago, YearOfTheDees said:

It's cheating you can call it anything you want but it's still cheating. 

Cheating implies intent. It is possible someone can be mistaken in the heat of the moment. 
 

But hey, I’m all for removing “cheating” from the game. How do you propose we go about that? 
 

If your plan is to penalise players for calling touched when it isn’t, your now saying we need to add yet another grey area which needs interpretation and relies on flawed review technology. No thanks! 

Edited August 23, 20231 yr by Smokey

47 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Unintended consequences alert 

We won't know for sure until all the Round 24 results are in. However, it could turn out that the real victims here are Geelong.

On 8/22/2023 at 8:55 PM, radar said:

Can someone please refresh my memory on how MFC were screwed in 1998 finals series after beating Crows by 10 goals in MCG final?

 

AFL later admitted they got our “seeding” wrong - MFC should’ve had easier opponent/no interstate travel or something. 
Couldn’t believe it at the time. 
Don’t feel sorry for Crows. 
 

McIntyre final eight system was poor.

12 hours ago, Smokey said:

Cheating implies intent. It is possible someone can be mistaken in the heat of the moment. 
 

But hey, I’m all for removing “cheating” from the game. How do you propose we go about that? 
 

If your plan is to penalise players for calling touched when it isn’t, your now saying we need to add yet another grey area which needs interpretation and relies on flawed review technology. No thanks! 

Maybe we should get the ARC to check every claim by a player that he touched the ball to see whether he's been cheating. If we do that, though, we're going to need an ARC the size of Noah's.

On 8/22/2023 at 9:03 PM, loges said:

Should it be called the ARC or the FarcE ?

Get rid of the E

Or 

LIASATS system

Lean In And Squint At The Screen

Edited August 24, 20231 yr by Brownie

Change the rules.

Between the goal posts is a goal, doesn't matter if touched or rushed. Fixed

50 minutes ago, ManDee said:

Change the rules.

Between the goal posts is a goal, doesn't matter if touched or rushed. Fixed

But what about the case where a player kicks a ball bouncing towards goal and an opposition player runs it through the goal under pressure within 9m?   Unless that is always a goal we will have umpires trying to decide if he ran it through under some unspecified degree of contol or if it just touched or brushed him.  Also I don't think we want kicks to be declared a goal when a defender makes a great effort to hit the ball through the goals.  

1 hour ago, ManDee said:

Change the rules.

Between the goal posts is a goal, doesn't matter if touched or rushed. Fixed

Doesn't that also mean players no longer have to kick the ball through the goals? That is, it can come off any part of the player's body?

2 hours ago, ManDee said:

Change the rules.

Between the goal posts is a goal, doesn't matter if touched or rushed. Fixed

I'd make it has to be kicked. Anything else is too radical change in the game

it if touches the point post and goes thru the goal zone, it's a goal

If it hits the point post and goes through for the point zone it's a point (instead of a throw in or out on the full).

Pros:

• Is in the spirit of the game (ie isn't a huge philosophical shift)
• Free
• Replicable at every level (which clearly any system using video review isn't)
• Takes the pressure off goal umpires (again, at every level) 
• Take one grey area away ie it is impossible to dispute if the ball went thru or not
• Takes human error out of the equation
• One less opportunity for the sort of drama we have seen since the keays non goal
• It means less reviews and therefore less delays and periods where the game stops

And finally it helps mitigate the inevitable unforeseen problems and unintended consequences that will flow from whatever half arsed solution the AFL lands on.

For example one of the solutions floated is going back to the rule where play can' restart until the goal umpire has waved his flags. The rule changes ive noted above would make that unnecessary if the issue was a query on whether it hit the post. 

Another solution being floated, in part in response to the one above, is to let play continue, review the vision and call it back if a mistake has been made.

The potential for such a rule to be stuffed up by the AFL is limitless. And that IS a major change to the way the game has always been played.  The rule changes ive noted above would make that unnecessary if the issue was a query on whether it hit the post.

Touched would still has to be reviewed, and they simply have to pony up for decent tech.

And fine (and suspend for any future infractions) any player, like Mckay who flat out lies, and there is irrefutable evidence they are lying, and screams at the goal umpire they touched it while gesticulating like some having stroke. No different to diving which ids a reportable offence.  

 

Edited August 24, 20231 yr by binman

4 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Doesn't that also mean players no longer have to kick the ball through the goals? That is, it can come off any part of the player's body?

LDVC, one option is like soccer if it goes in the net it's a goal doesn't matter how it gets there, or it has to be kicked. Either way it is much easier to umpire and expensive sub standard inaccurate systems are not required. 

Edited August 24, 20231 yr by ManDee