1 - the central umpire makes the final call, not the goal umpire. Remember the Brisbane game where the goal umpire called a behind and the central umpire called a mark to John Brown? They fluffed for 2 mins, called umpires call, central umpire called a mark to Brown who goaled.
2 - the umpire can be wrong or a player appeals and no referral is made, it's the umpires call and if he is sure (despite being wrong), no review is made. Can't remember which game, but it happened with Pears clearly touching a ball and no review was taken so it remained a goal on the scoreboard.
Reducing the inconclusives is one thing, dealing with them when they arrive is another.
That was ridiculous. If there is confusion or inconclusive, the call should be made back to the goal umpire, not the field umpire.
as long as they don't let boundary umpires who are twenty meters away overrule goal umpires who are in the ideal position i will be happy.
i also think they should do away with review touched decisions because they take the longest and more often than not the footage is inclusive because they frame rate isn't high enough.
yep - They just love sticking their two cents in and causing doubt and confusion.
as long as they don't let boundary umpires who are twenty meters away overrule goal umpires who are in the ideal position i will be happy.
i also think they should do away with review touched decisions because they take the longest and more often than not the footage is inclusive because they frame rate isn't high enough.
yep - They just love sticking their two cents in and causing doubt and confusion.
Yep, this sh*ts me too. Your job is run up and down the wings, and throw the ball over your head when required. Lets not start to get fancy by thinking you can actually see the goals properly.
as long as they don't let boundary umpires who are twenty meters away overrule goal umpires who are in the ideal position i will be happy.
i also think they should do away with review touched decisions because they take the longest and more often than not the footage is inclusive because they frame rate isn't high enough.
yep - They just love sticking their two cents in and causing doubt and confusion.
Yep, this sh*ts me too. Your job is run up and down the wings backwards, and throw the ball over your head when required. Lets not start to get fancy by thinking you can actually see the goals properly.
Why do they need to see every angle at the same time? Shouldn't they look at each angle one its own so they can fully concentrate? Then go do the next angle...they can then judge what angle they need if the first was not clear.
"The new score review system allows the reviewer to look at multiple angles simultaneously, as opposed to the previous system where relevant angles were replayed by the broadcaster one at a time.
"Our trials have shown this new technology helps produce quicker decisions and more accurate decisions."
Wow, they have technology that allows somebody to watch multiple camera angles at the one time. Geez, that's like high level NASA stuff there. It's amazing what they can do with computers these days...
"The new score review system allows the reviewer to look at multiple angles simultaneously, as opposed to the previous system where relevant angles were replayed by the broadcaster one at a time.
"Our trials have shown this new technology helps produce quicker decisions and more accurate decisions."
Wow, they have technology that allows somebody to watch multiple camera angles at the one time. Geez, that's like high level NASA stuff there. It's amazing what they can do with computers these days...
A bit like that setup you've got in that secret room of yours, hey?
"The new score review system allows the reviewer to look at multiple angles simultaneously, as opposed to the previous system where relevant angles were replayed by the broadcaster one at a time.
"Our trials have shown this new technology helps produce quicker decisions and more accurate decisions."
Wow, they have technology that allows somebody to watch multiple camera angles at the one time. Geez, that's like high level NASA stuff there. It's amazing what they can do with computers these days...
A bit like that setup you've got in that secret room of yours, hey?
It would be a whole lot easier if they got rid of the touching the post rule. If you get it through the big sticks it‘s a goal, touched post or no touched post. Same for a behind and the point post. I‘d even be tempted to say meh to it being touched - call it a goal.
And while we are at it, apply the same to the tennis with the let call. Seriously, ball brushes the net on a serve and they have to do it again. WTF
"The new score review system allows the reviewer to look at multiple angles simultaneously, as opposed to the previous system where relevant angles were replayed by the broadcaster one at a time.
"Our trials have shown this new technology helps produce quicker decisions and more accurate decisions."
Wow, they have technology that allows somebody to watch multiple camera angles at the one time. Geez, that's like high level NASA stuff there. It's amazing what they can do with computers these days...
A bit like that setup you've got in that secret room of yours, hey?
Well it's clearly not that secret, is it?
I've seen the movie Sliver. Some sections of it many times over. So I naturally assumed all perverts have a room like that.
"The new score review system allows the reviewer to look at multiple angles simultaneously, as opposed to the previous system where relevant angles were replayed by the broadcaster one at a time.
"Our trials have shown this new technology helps produce quicker decisions and more accurate decisions."
Wow, they have technology that allows somebody to watch multiple camera angles at the one time. Geez, that's like high level NASA stuff there. It's amazing what they can do with computers these days...
This entire thing is actually just channel 7 finding another use for the mega wall. It's not enough to show it before quarters, now they can use it for score reviews as well.
It would be a whole lot easier if they got rid of the touching the post rule. If you get it through the big sticks it‘s a goal, touched post or no touched post. Same for a behind and the point post. I‘d even be tempted to say meh to it being touched - call it a goal.
And while we are at it, apply the same to the tennis with the let call. Seriously, ball brushes the net on a serve and they have to do it again. WTF
oki doki - that‘s it from me.
What if it goes over the post? Did part of the ball go through the behinds or the goals? Did the ball go directly over the posts, if so what happens?
Surely they can find some technology that will register a noise or a light to go off if the ball makes contact with the post.
What I honestly dont understand is that they can get ultra slow mo shots of players spinning the balls in their hands, or players celebrating after a goal where you can see every little bit of sinew in their body flex and tense, but they cant do that same ultra slow mo on the ball when its going through the goal, which would make the review a lot easier as youd actually be able to see, not judge, the shifts in ball movement/ spin/ and whether it touched a players hand.
It would be a whole lot easier if they got rid of the touching the post rule. If you get it through the big sticks it‘s a goal, touched post or no touched post. Same for a behind and the point post. I‘d even be tempted to say meh to it being touched - call it a goal.
And while we are at it, apply the same to the tennis with the let call. Seriously, ball brushes the net on a serve and they have to do it again. WTF
oki doki - that‘s it from me.
Don't care about the tennis but a big NOOOOOOOOO to your idea of letting a touched ball be called a goal. Can't imagine the game without the explosion of relief and cheering from thue Bomber faithful when those long fingertips of Fletch kiss the ball as he dives full tilt towards the goal line to save us 5 points.
It would be a whole lot easier if they got rid of the touching the post rule. If you get it through the big sticks it‘s a goal, touched post or no touched post. Same for a behind and the point post. I‘d even be tempted to say meh to it being touched - call it a goal.
And while we are at it, apply the same to the tennis with the let call. Seriously, ball brushes the net on a serve and they have to do it again. WTF
oki doki - that‘s it from me.
What if it goes over the post? Did part of the ball go through the behinds or the goals? Did the ball go directly over the posts, if so what happens?
Surely they can find some technology that will register a noise or a light to go off if the ball makes contact with the post.
What if it goes over the post?
Did part of the ball go through the behinds or the goals? Did the ball go directly over the posts, if so what happens?
Any or all over the goal post = goal. Any or all over the point post = behind.
It'll change the game we know with rushed behinds and last ditch dives to save a goal, so it's not a perfect suggestion.. but for those situations where it goes through mainly from a a kick and maybe-maybe not touched, then call it a goal
There will no doubt be an area where the goal umpire has to make a call and for those where the ball is way way..... way up high over the goal posts…. well that‘s one where all the angles etc will probably never be conclusive and we just have to cop what the umpire says.
EDIT ha - typing while b00bytrap was posting. Agree that is that fly in the ointment, but for the brushing the post scenario let's make it simple..
It would be a whole lot easier if they got rid of the touching the post rule. If you get it through the big sticks it‘s a goal, touched post or no touched post. Same for a behind and the point post. I‘d even be tempted to say meh to it being touched - call it a goal.
And while we are at it, apply the same to the tennis with the let call. Seriously, ball brushes the net on a serve and they have to do it again. WTF
oki doki - that‘s it from me.
What if it goes over the post? Did part of the ball go through the behinds or the goals? Did the ball go directly over the posts, if so what happens?
Surely they can find some technology that will register a noise or a light to go off if the ball makes contact with the post.
What if it goes over the post?
Did part of the ball go through the behinds or the goals? Did the ball go directly over the posts, if so what happens?
Any or all over the goal post = goal. Any or all over the point post = behind.
It'll change the game we know with rushed behinds and last ditch dives to save a goal, so it's not a perfect suggestion.. but for those situations where it goes through mainly from a a kick and maybe-maybe not touched, then call it a goal
There will no doubt be an area where the goal umpire has to make a call and for those where the ball is way way..... way up high over the goal posts…. well that‘s one where all the angles etc will probably never be conclusive and we just have to cop what the umpire says.
EDIT ha - typing while b00bytrap was posting. Agree that is that fly in the ointment, but for the brushing the post scenario let's make it simple..
It would be a whole lot easier if they got rid of the touching the post rule. If you get it through the big sticks it‘s a goal, touched post or no touched post. Same for a behind and the point post. I‘d even be tempted to say meh to it being touched - call it a goal.
And while we are at it, apply the same to the tennis with the let call. Seriously, ball brushes the net on a serve and they have to do it again. WTF
oki doki - that‘s it from me.
Don't care about the tennis but a big NOOOOOOOOO to your idea of letting a touched ball be called a goal. Can't imagine the game without the explosion of relief and cheering from thue Bomber faithful when those long fingertips of Fletch kiss the ball as he dives full tilt towards the goal line to save us 5 points.
