Goal Review 1 and 2

[CURLY]

Both reviews went against both costing us goals.

Both times the umpire chose the option to go against StKilda.

Amazing to think you can get it so wrong against a team twice.

[Yorkeys]

System is a joke. Better for field ump to just toss a coin and for any goal ump that needs a review to be dropped for 3 matches, just to sharpen focus. Put goal review money into a better MRO. Surely M. Christian has to go at the end of the season and deviations from precedents fully explained - such subjective rubbish at the moment; I just hope its incompetence' not corruption.

[Devilhead]

Its a pretty simple fix - everytime the Goal umpire is unsure then the result should stand as a behind unless the goal review clearly shows it being a goal

This should be the standard

Also the AFL need to invest more in the technology so its the same standard across all grounds

[avid]

Personally I think the current system is good.
There's always going to be moments when you can't tell, and it becomes semi-arbitrary.
But they are always going to be much much finer points than the contentious decision of the old days.
Hawkin's "goal" in the '09 GF -- nothing like that could possibly happen now.
Membrey's goal against Richmond during the season? Could never have been picked accurately in real time. Correct decision purely due to camera work.

Having said all that, I feel very sure the "touched" decision against Sinclair's goal was demonstrably wrong.
From two camera angles, the ball and the hand overlapped. From the third (with the goal post padding seen behind) there was clearly a sizeable gap between hand and ball -- thereby showing it could not have been touched.
An error.
Frustrating.
(But we did not lose by 5 points.)

[The_Dud]

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?” Vlastuin tweeted.

https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/vlastuin ... ArqnSjs7GI

[CURLY]

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?” Vlastuin tweeted.

https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/vlastuin ... ArqnSjs7GI

Well he obviously didn't and yes that makes you a cheat.

[Selhurst Saint]

When you collapse to the ground in the first quarter trying to milk a free kick without being touched ??? That makes you a cheat Vlastuin. No Integrity.

[CarlD]

This is the same player who acts like his head has been ripped off when he gets hit in the chest. Hmmm...

[Leo.J]

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?” Vlastuin tweeted.

https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/vlastuin ... ArqnSjs7GI

Someone? Most of the grandstand and commentators more like it.

[The_Dud]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

[CURLY]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

[The_Dud]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?”

What is that indeed.

[CURLY]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?”

What is that indeed.

And if the goal umpire signaled a goal and the review backed it is he a cheat?

[The_Dud]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?”

What is that indeed.

And if the goal umpire signaled a goal and the review backed it is he a cheat?

And if my aunty had balls...

The two people by far in the best position to know if it was touched say it was touched, anyone trying to act like they know better are just embarrassing themselves.

[CURLY]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?”

What is that indeed.

And if the goal umpire signaled a goal and the review backed it is he a cheat?

And if my aunty had balls...

The two people by far in the best position to know if it was touched say it was touched, anyone trying to act like they know better are just embarrassing themselves.

So when Howard said he touched it you were more than happy for him to be over ruled.

[The_Dud]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?”

What is that indeed.

And if the goal umpire signaled a goal and the review backed it is he a cheat?

And if my aunty had balls...

The two people by far in the best position to know if it was touched say it was touched, anyone trying to act like they know better are just embarrassing themselves.

So when Howard said he touched it you were more than happy for him to be over ruled.

No one said he didn't touch it, just where he touched it.

The umpire thought it was over the line, so it's a behind unless conclusive evidence says otherwise.

I think you need to brush up on the rules.

[CURLY]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?”

What is that indeed.

And if the goal umpire signaled a goal and the review backed it is he a cheat?

And if my aunty had balls...

The two people by far in the best position to know if it was touched say it was touched, anyone trying to act like they know better are just embarrassing themselves.

So when Howard said he touched it you were more than happy for him to be over ruled.

No one said he didn't touch it, just where he touched it.

The umpire thought it was over the line, so it's a behind unless conclusive evidence says otherwise.

I think you need to brush up on the rules.

So both calls the umpire made were in the oppositions favor. Enough said.

[The_Dud]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?”

What is that indeed.

And if the goal umpire signaled a goal and the review backed it is he a cheat?

And if my aunty had balls...

The two people by far in the best position to know if it was touched say it was touched, anyone trying to act like they know better are just embarrassing themselves.

So when Howard said he touched it you were more than happy for him to be over ruled.

No one said he didn't touch it, just where he touched it.

The umpire thought it was over the line, so it's a behind unless conclusive evidence says otherwise.

I think you need to brush up on the rules.

So both calls the umpire made were in the oppositions favor. Enough said.

Yes Curly, unlike you the umpires call it as they see it, and amazingly that can result in TWO things going against you in a row, crazy as those odds are... lol

[CURLY]

Oh my bad, I get it, wrong colour jumper, therefore must be lying

Vlaustin didn't touch it he only suggested it after he looked like a total arse for missing it by so much.

“When you know you touched the ball, the goal umpire thinks so too, but someone watching from the stands calls you a cheat, what is that?”

What is that indeed.

And if the goal umpire signaled a goal and the review backed it is he a cheat?

And if my aunty had balls...

The two people by far in the best position to know if it was touched say it was touched, anyone trying to act like they know better are just embarrassing themselves.

So when Howard said he touched it you were more than happy for him to be over ruled.

No one said he didn't touch it, just where he touched it.

The umpire thought it was over the line, so it's a behind unless conclusive evidence says otherwise.

I think you need to brush up on the rules.

So both calls the umpire made were in the oppositions favor. Enough said.

Yes Curly, unlike you the umpires call it as they see it, and amazingly that can result in TWO things going against you in a row, crazy as those odds are... lol

The goal review on Friday was a farce anyone suggesting other wise is cooked.

[The_Dud]

Anyone suggesting that yellow blur was conclusive is delusional.

So I understand where you're coming from Curls

[CURLY]

Anyone suggesting that yellow blur was conclusive is delusional.

So I understand where you're coming from Curls

No deviation ball looked to clear the clenched fist by 2 inches. Boundary riders in line with the goal both said Vlasutin was no where near it.

[The_Dud]

Anyone suggesting that yellow blur was conclusive is delusional.

So I understand where you're coming from Curls

No deviation ball looked to clear the clenched fist by 2 inches. Boundary riders in line with the goal both said Vlasutin was no where near it.