Jump to content

The Neal-Bullen non goal


Elwood 3184

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, No10 said:

I’ve watched it, scrubbed and zoomed. Not there. Not touched.

Who at the club do you expect to hear from? The president? I don’t hear much from her at all.

Whereas Collingwood or Hawthorn in their window, I know you would.

This is precisely the problem, a winning culture. Can not accept less so easily.

1.png.e8bcb06d209405e48370b0f1c0b5e015.png2.png.e3b1269a9a9f8c1980e91ffeacb7cfbf.png

 

I can see a deviated wedding ring or middle finger on his right hand on the lower picture. The picture above is 2 frames prior to give you a baseline.

I take no pleasure in trying to prove this point, it’s up to you whether you see the proof or not. 

 

Edited by Gawndy the Great
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

1.png.e8bcb06d209405e48370b0f1c0b5e015.png2.png.e3b1269a9a9f8c1980e91ffeacb7cfbf.png

 

I can see a deviated wedding ring or middle finger on his right hand on the lower picture. The picture above is 2 frames prior to give you a baseline.

I take no pleasure in trying to prove this point, it’s up to you whether you see the proof or not. 

 

I know, I uploaded the video. The middle finger is possible. But unlikely. If there was a touch it would’ve bent backwards and separated from the other fingers. All the fingers continue into the same motion blur direction as the ball passes and the hand moves down.

This isn’t proof. That’s why it’s a problem.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

1.png.e8bcb06d209405e48370b0f1c0b5e015.png2.png.e3b1269a9a9f8c1980e91ffeacb7cfbf.png

 

I can see a deviated wedding ring or middle finger on his right hand on the lower picture. The picture above is 2 frames prior to give you a baseline.

I take no pleasure in trying to prove this point, it’s up to you whether you see the proof or not. 

 

well i think the point is that it has to be pretty conclusive to overide

i just can't see anything conclusive and i'm trying to be as neutral as i can

  • Like 2
  • Clap 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2023 at 11:17 AM, WalkingCivilWar said:

Then how on earth did the Ben Keays goal vs Sydney remain a behind?

For mine, that was the biggest howler of the season since there was absolutely no question it was a goal, a fact that was confirmed when the AFL came out and apologised for it. At the time someone on here said who cares it’s Adelaide, I hate ‘em anyways. But that’s not the point. Even disregarding the fact that it cost Adelaide a chance to play finals, it was the most outrageous goal decision we’ve seen in a long time. 

i have an insider in the ARC so i know how it works and the process was once the ball is live -so kicked out by the swans defender the arc can no longer jump in and overturn, it's that simple, they saw it but had genuinely no time to get in

5 hours ago, daisycutter said:

on the footage above, and watching in slo-mo and frame by frame

i see no finger bending

i see no ball deviation

i can't therefore see any conclusive evidence to overturn all umpires decisions, who didn't even refer it to arc

very surprised the press hasn't picked up on it

cost the game????

the broadcast cuts at a poor time but on the wide angle u can see the ball pop off the hand and change path slightly and the finger definitely flicks on the review unfortunately, i just watched it back

1 hour ago, GBDee said:

Some of the confusion stems from the evidence presented by Ch7 at half-time. Evidence that was flawed. I can’t upload the clip but in the first still below, the 3rd/4th fingers of Kemp’s bandaged left hand appear to touch the ball and, trust me, they did seem to wobble. Ch7 went back and forward in slowmo on this and I was taken in and posted as such on the matchday thread. (Ignore the hands at the top btw, they’re Hewett’s but he’s actually 2m from the ball.)

IMG_4171.thumb.jpeg.975383c73b4a0a9543f3eb0ab6175ae9.jpeg

Shameful smoke and mirrors by Ch7 as the next shot reveals. His left hand was actually nowhere near the ball.

IMG_4163.thumb.jpeg.ad625e0c1b8b7086229a3db02bea71c8.jpeg

Indeed, the goal was overturned by ARC because it “was touched by the right hand of the Carlton defender” (although I’d argue this was inconclusive so it should have stood as a goal).  

Begs the question though, why did Channel 7 present seriously flawed evidence at HT to support the ‘touched’ narrative? 

coz its their fancy 4k zoom camera new toy that the afl is paying overs for so they wanted to use it even if it didn't add anything

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Turner said:

i have an insider in the ARC so i know how it works and the process was once the ball is live -so kicked out by the swans defender the arc can no longer jump in and overturn, it's that simple, they saw it but had genuinely no time to get in

the broadcast cuts at a poor time but on the wide angle u can see the ball pop off the hand and change path slightly and the finger definitely flicks on the review unfortunately, i just watched it back

coz its their fancy 4k zoom camera new toy that the afl is paying overs for so they wanted to use it even if it didn't add anything

This is a nice defence of your friend in the ARC.

But at the end of the day, you’re looking at the same footage as everyone else and I don’t see the finger bending or the deviation.

Honestly, I can be impartial and if the field umpire called touched I would’ve accepted that. But this isn’t even close to a standard for overturning.

  • Like 2
  • Clap 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, No10 said:

This is a nice defence of your friend in the ARC.

But at the end of the day, you’re looking at the same footage as everyone else and I don’t see the finger bending or the deviation.

Honestly, I can be impartial and if the field umpire called touched I would’ve accepted that. But this isn’t even close to a standard for overturning.

@Turnerthat sounded sarcastic about your ARC friend, wasn’t meant to be. But I mean… if you have a friend in the ARC, maybe there’s something we can offer so these 50/50 calls fall in our favour next year? Demonland membership perhaps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Turner said:

i have an insider in the ARC so i know how it works and the process was once the ball is live -so kicked out by the swans defender the arc can no longer jump in and overturn, it's that simple, they saw it but had genuinely no time to get in

the broadcast cuts at a poor time but on the wide angle u can see the ball pop off the hand and change path slightly and the finger definitely flicks on the review unfortunately, i just watched it back

coz its their fancy 4k zoom camera new toy that the afl is paying overs for so they wanted to use it even if it didn't add anything

well show me the footage you are talking about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, daisycutter said:

on the footage above, and watching in slo-mo and frame by frame

i see no finger bending

i see no ball deviation

i can't therefore see any conclusive evidence to overturn all umpires decisions, who didn't even refer it to arc

very surprised the press hasn't picked up on it

cost the game????

The media don’t give a rat’s about us.

We are seeing that demonstrated over and again.

So much luck in footy. Carlton have had 7 arc reviews since the Petracca one and won every single one. In the same period we lost all of ours. One different result against Carlton would have had us in the PF.

  • Like 3
  • Love 1
  • Angry 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


10 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

1.png.e8bcb06d209405e48370b0f1c0b5e015.png2.png.e3b1269a9a9f8c1980e91ffeacb7cfbf.png

 

I can see a deviated wedding ring or middle finger on his right hand on the lower picture. The picture above is 2 frames prior to give you a baseline.

I take no pleasure in trying to prove this point, it’s up to you whether you see the proof or not. 

 

You cant overturn a goal on that. Nothing definitive whatsoever. No umprire called it. The ARC made its own decision.

 

Its garbage

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were basically denied 3 goals…..

The Neal Bullen “touched”.

The obvious front on interference on Smith, directly in front of goal, in Q1.

The reversal after Smith’s good mark in front, when Pickett and McGovern jumper pushed each other in the upper chest.

          Also, but less definite,late in the last quarter Viney was thrown off the ball during a scrimmage in our goal-square.

          Does anyone know what the free was for, against Oliver in Q4, in our forward pocket?(when he was given a millisecond to move back, but penalised 50 metres for not stepping back fast enough.) Compare that to the non-50 metres when he was retarded in the centre after marking in Q4.

It seems we were unlucky repeatedly with 50:50 decisions, so we lost by 2 points and are branded “chokers”, while every Carlton player is a gutsy champion.

  • Like 2
  • Clap 5
  • Angry 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

We were basically denied 3 goals…..

The Neal Bullen “touched”.

The obvious front on interference on Smith, directly in front of goal, in Q1.

The reversal after Smith’s good mark in front, when Pickett and McGovern jumper pushed each other in the upper chest.

          Also, but less definite,late in the last quarter Viney was thrown off the ball during a scrimmage in our goal-square.

          Does anyone know what the free was for, against Oliver in Q4, in our forward pocket?(when he was given a millisecond to move back, but penalised 50 metres for not stepping back fast enough.) Compare that to the non-50 metres when he was retarded in the centre after marking in Q4.

It seems we were unlucky repeatedly with 50:50 decisions, so we lost by 2 points and are branded “chokers”, while every Carlton player is a gutsy champion.

The free was against MacDonald not Clarry. Complete BS for to high TMac tried to jump over the guy. The 50 was against Clarry for not moving back the fact it would have been impossible to hear never occurred to the preened 22. We got absolutely screwed on these decisions notwithstanding we shot ourselves in the foot

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still can't get an answer - did the guy who was deemed to have touched it protest that he did?  It is (conveniently) absent from the footage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

We were basically denied 3 goals…..

The Neal Bullen “touched”.

The obvious front on interference on Smith, directly in front of goal, in Q1.

The reversal after Smith’s good mark in front, when Pickett and McGovern jumper pushed each other in the upper chest.

          Also, but less definite,late in the last quarter Viney was thrown off the ball during a scrimmage in our goal-square.

          Does anyone know what the free was for, against Oliver in Q4, in our forward pocket?(when he was given a millisecond to move back, but penalised 50 metres for not stepping back fast enough.) Compare that to the non-50 metres when he was retarded in the centre after marking in Q4.

It seems we were unlucky repeatedly with 50:50 decisions, so we lost by 2 points and are branded “chokers”, while every Carlton player is a gutsy champion.

You could add a fourth, the block in the goal square that allowed Acres. Hands in the air no attempt to mark. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, monoccular said:

I still can't get an answer - did the guy who was deemed to have touched it protest that he did?  It is (conveniently) absent from the footage.

There didn't appear to be much from memory but I was at the ground and refuse to watch any footage of that game other than what is posted here on DL. But I'm sure all clubs have been told that all goals / points will be reviewed, so you could argue that he was confident that it would be picked up via the ARC. 

  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

There didn't appear to be much from memory but I was at the ground and refuse to watch any footage of that game other than what is posted here on DL. But I'm sure all clubs have been told that all goals / points will be reviewed, so you could argue that he was confident that it would be picked up via the ARC. 

Unlikely scenario!

If the Carlton guy got a fingernail to it, he would have desperately gesticulated to the umpire immediately….. not just hoped the routine review would pick it up despite his indifference.

  • Like 2
  • Clap 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Deesprate said:

The free was against MacDonald not Clarry. Complete BS for to high TMac tried to jump over the guy. The 50 was against Clarry for not moving back the fact it would have been impossible to hear never occurred to the preened 22. We got absolutely screwed on these decisions notwithstanding we shot ourselves in the foot

One thing that really peeves me off right now is a free kick deep in the forward line and then a 50 straight after to bring them right out of trouble. The whole thing happens too quickly for comprehension and it's always impossible to explain to someone who doesn't know much about the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, daisycutter said:

well show me the footage you are talking about

Dais, Turner is referring to the Ben Keays goal, Adel vs Syd., not the ANB non-goal. 👍🏽🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Deesprate said:

The free was against MacDonald not Clarry. Complete BS for to high TMac tried to jump over the guy. The 50 was against Clarry for not moving back the fact it would have been impossible to hear never occurred to the preened 22. We got absolutely screwed on these decisions notwithstanding we shot ourselves in the foot

Clarry had to go back to the 9.

Its been a 50 all season. He didn't. He should have known. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


17 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

1.png.e8bcb06d209405e48370b0f1c0b5e015.png2.png.e3b1269a9a9f8c1980e91ffeacb7cfbf.png

 

I can see a deviated wedding ring or middle finger on his right hand on the lower picture. The picture above is 2 frames prior to give you a baseline.

I take no pleasure in trying to prove this point, it’s up to you whether you see the proof or not. 

 

I’ve seen plenty of marks paid that are a lot more obviously touched than this. 
Add it to the ‘why is it always us’ list. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, monoccular said:

I still can't get an answer - did the guy who was deemed to have touched it protest that he did?  It is (conveniently) absent from the footage.

Yes. Kemp immediately tapped his hand to claim a touch but this means nothing as players are now routinely doing this, regardless... A goal was called but ARC will have seen Kemp’s claim which may have influenced them to overturn. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, daisycutter said:

well show me the footage you are talking about

for legal reasons im not sure im allowed to

15 hours ago, No10 said:

@Turnerthat sounded sarcastic about your ARC friend, wasn’t meant to be. But I mean… if you have a friend in the ARC, maybe there’s something we can offer so these 50/50 calls fall in our favour next year? Demonland membership perhaps?

trust me mate it was as painful for me as it was for the next person

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Redleg said:

The media don’t give a rat’s about us.

 
Our brand is boring, monotonous and un-attractive.
 

If I was the media I'd wouldn't either.

Edited by Fork 'em
  • Facepalm 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Turner said:

for legal reasons im not sure im allowed to

trust me mate it was as painful for me as it was for the next person

surely you are not suggesting the arc is some sort of secretive organisation that doesn't have to be transparent?

if there is nothing to hide why not show the footage?

  • Like 1
  • Clap 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

surely you are not suggesting the arc is some sort of secretive organisation that doesn't have to be transparent?

if there is nothing to hide why not show the footage?

Maybe it will leak out once Collingwood and Carlton are securely locked away onto the GF 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    FROZEN by Whispering Jack

    Who would have thought?    Collingwood had a depleted side with several star players out injured, Max Gawn was in stellar form, Christian Petracca at the top of his game and Simon Goodwin was about to pull off a masterstroke in setting Alex Neal-Bullen onto him to do a fantastic job in subduing the Magpies' best player. Goody had his charges primed to respond robustly to the challenge of turning around their disappointing performance against Fremantle in Alice Springs. And if not that, t

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 7

    TURNAROUND by KC from Casey

    The Casey Demons won their first game at home this year in the traditional King’s Birthday Weekend clash with Collingwood VFL on Sunday in a dramatic turnaround on recent form that breathed new life into the beleaguered club’s season. The Demons led from the start to record a 52-point victory. It was their highest score and biggest winning margin by far for the 2024 season. Under cloudy but calm conditions for Casey Fields, the home side, wearing the old Springvale guernsey as a mark of res

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Casey Articles

    PREGAME: Rd 15 vs North Melbourne

    After two disappointing back to back losses the Demons have the bye in Round 14 and then face perennial cellar dweller North Melbourne at the MCG on Saturday night in Round 15. Who comes in and who goes out?

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 114

    PODCAST: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Tuesday, 11th June @ 8:30pm. Join George, Binman & I as we analyse the Demons loss at the MCG against the Magpies in the Round 13 on Kings Birthday. You questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human. L

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 35

    VOTES: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

    Captain Max Gawn has a considerable lead over reigning champion Christian Petracca in the Demonland Player of the Year Award. Steven May, Alex Neal-Bullen & Jack Viney make up the Top 5. Your votes for the loss against the Magpies. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 41

    POSTGAME: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

    Once again inaccuracy and inefficiency going inside 50 rears it's ugly head as the Demons suffered their second loss on the trot and their fourth loss in five games as they go down to the Pies by 38 points on Kings Birthday at the MCG.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 413

    GAMEDAY: Rd 13 vs Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons are once again faced with a classic 8 point game against a traditional rival on King's Birthday at the MCG. A famous victory will see them reclaim a place in the Top 8 whereas a loss will be another blow for their finals credentials.

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 941

    BOILED LOLLIES by The Oracle

    In the space of a month Melbourne has gone from chocolates to boiled lollies in terms of its standing as a candidate for the AFL premiership.  The club faces its moment of truth against a badly bruised up Collingwood at the MCG. A win will give it some respite but even then, it won’t be regarded particularly well being against an opponent carrying the burden of an injured playing list. A loss would be a disaster. The Demons have gone from a six/two win/loss ratio and a strong percentag

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews 3

    CLEAN HANDS by KC from Casey

    The Casey Demons headed into town and up Sydney Road to take on the lowly Coburg Lions who have been perennial VFL easy beats and sitting on one win for the season. Last year, Casey beat them in a practice match when resting their AFL listed players. That’s how bad they were. Nobody respected them on Saturday and clearly not the Demons who came to the game with 22 players (ten MFC), but whether they came out to play is another matter because for the most part, their intensity was lacking an

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Casey Articles
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

×
×
  • Create New...