The goal that wasn't

[matrix]

good f****** lord
sometimes your posts have to be read umpteen times just to make any sense what so ever

seriously

maybe check it before you post it to see if it actually reads back ok

[kosifantutti]

The ball separates from the player when it leaves his hands to hit his chest.
Thought that was obvious.

It didnt though. The ball was always touching the body of the player otherwise why wouldnt the review umpire give a point like the goal umpire originally thought it was?

Ummm. Because he got it wrong. Isn't that what we're discussing?

To overrule the decision made on field there has to be conclusive evidence that it was wrong.

[matrix]

you better stop Kos

you'll confuse him about...well, anything really

[plugger66]

The ball separates from the player when it leaves his hands to hit his chest.
Thought that was obvious.

It didnt though. The ball was always touching the body of the player otherwise why wouldnt the review umpire give a point like the goal umpire originally thought it was?

Ummm. Because he got it wrong. Isn't that what we're discussing?

To overrule the decision made on field there has to be conclusive evidence that it was wrong.

Well if it separted from the body it is pretty easy to see. i cannot see the ball separating from the body and obviously the review umpire didnt either but the goal umpire did.

[kosifantutti]

But you can't look at the video and say it definitely did not, which is what is required for an overrule of the on field decision.

[plugger66]

But you can't look at the video and say it definitely did not, which is what is required for an overrule of the on field decision.

Well he did and i agree with him looking at it. I said to a mate last night is going to be a mark IMO. To me it went into his hands then through his hands and then onto the chest. I never saw the ball leave the body.

[gringo]

Two lots of commentators at the ground were going off about how bad a decision it was. Said it was clearly a goal. Obviously they were only at the ground so have no idea like Plugger who has special powers that can tell if an umpire calls it it must be right.

[matrix]

well i wouldve paid a chest mark

if he wasnt over the bloody goal line

hence: goal to gears

[stinger]

Two lots of commentators at the ground were going off about how bad a decision it was. Said it was clearly a goal. Obviously they were only at the ground so have no idea like Plugger who has special powers that can tell if an umpire calls it it must be right.

it was a f****** goal.....the umpire was unsighted and made a wrong call...the video showed ...well to me it did...that the player was about 2-3 feet over the line ffs....

[plugger66]

Two lots of commentators at the ground were going off about how bad a decision it was. Said it was clearly a goal. Obviously they were only at the ground so have no idea like Plugger who has special powers that can tell if an umpire calls it it must be right.

Sorry Gringo but we actually are discussing whether it was a mark or was a point. The silly camera angle gave us no idea about the goal. By the way Gringo what was the decision. You dont actually think I paid the decision or had anything to do with it. Why get angry at me because the review umpire didnt have the right tools to say it was a goal. Can you tell me why you think it was a goal?

[bergsone]

imo clearly a goal

[matrix]

"can you tell me why you think it was a goal"

pmsl

well theres this big white line see
between the posts
and he was over the line in the air when he marked it
hence
we think

it was a goal
numpty

[joffaboy]

. Firstly SW complained about players blocking off the ball. I did not see one post last night on that and that is due to most of us watching on TV so we cant see the blocks. i did see hundreds of posts complaining about nearly every decision being wrong and the umpires are cheats because the AFl tell them to cheat.

Posted by me at 8:59 PM last night on the "Umpires are Cheats" thread

[No that was a fair contest. Riewoldt got blocked all night but not ne free kick. One block at a ball up in front of goal and guess what?

Keep protecting the umpires. Do you get a cut from their winnings?

. Sorry but i honestly dont think the umpires cheat and i certainly dont think the AFL tell them to cheat. before last night Sydney were near the bottom of frees so why would it just start against us?

I dont think they cheat either. The AFL should confirm this by checking the umpires bank accounts for any dodgey deposits. If the AFL directed them to cheat they would have done so for us last night to try and make it a better result for the New Zealand venture.

No I believe that because of lack of scrutiny and their incredibly huge ego's the umpires are just pathetically incompetent

Hopelessly and terminally so. And whose fault is that? Well in my opinion it is the AFL and Geischen for protecting the umpires so much they think they are part of the entertainment.

I pointed out LAST NIGHT Riewoldt was blocked all night, but who gets the blocking free to make sure the game is won by the Swans? Armstrong gets in the back when incorrect disposal of the ball, Steven or Ross (cant remember) gets incorrect disposal of the ball when it was exactly the same as Armstrong.

Swans get a 50 for Geary twitching and not being 5 cm's back, Swans kick the ball away AFTER the free given to Riewoldt - no 50.

The inconsistency and incompetence is laughable.

. And I didnt do any s*** last night apart disagree with people who IMO got the decisions wrong or called umpires cheats

BS -you make snide comments about people being on medication and more snide comments about not growing up with the game (inferring I shouldn't comment because, you know you obviously have a god given right to an opinion because you "grew up with the game"). You blatently call another poster a liar, even though he later stated he watched the game at a pub.

You tell people to watch with both eyes open (again inferring just because we support a team, we cant tell when decisions are right or wrong) and basically infer we are whingers.

But then the senior coach complains about the incompetence of the umpires selectively applying the rules and completely contradicts the

. i may not be the best umpire in the world, probably far from it, but I have done it for 25 years so have an idea about it.

couldn't care less. You are not an AFL umpire paid up to $100k a year. i would expect you to make errors. I even expect the umpires to make errors. But the cascade of incredibly one sided decisions I have seen this year is beyond the pale for such a professional sport.

. i dont question you on accounting because I reckon you would have a lot more idea than me on that subject.

So you umpire as a professional? Even so if my Accounting work was so inconsistent, and so incompetent that it was influencing outcomes so badly, I would expect to be critisised, and maybe even sanctioned. The client doing so would not have to get a "please explain" letter from me of have to pay a $10k fine for bring the profession into disrepute (even though it was me who had done so)

. Its funny but before Mark Fine started umpiring at Ormond he thought it was an easy job but he realises how difficult it is and not because you make mistakes but when you make a decision 50% of people think you are wrong.

I couldn't care less about amateur umpires. They do their best in competitions not tainted like the AFL. Where rules are for some but not others. Where the umpiring is supposed to be at the top level but is so inconsstent and incompetent that it is wrecking games.

So bad that the senior coach, who knows the AFL will come down on him like a tonne of bricks for even suggestion their goldne haired boys were not applying the rules, had to say something at the presser.

The umpires last night were disgraceful, and if you dont think they are incompetent, well something else has to explain such a one sided and biased performance.

So i hark back to my original suggestion. The AFL should be able to investigate the umpires bank accounts and make sure they haven't been getting kickbacks from bookies.

So P66 dont piss on my back and tell me its raining, if the umpires are not incompetent, they must be on the take, because their performance last night was a travesty for a so called professional sport.

[SainterK]

Gears deserved two, wish Roo had made sure of it

[plugger66]

"can you tell me why you think it was a goal"

pmsl

well theres this big white line see
between the posts
and he was over the line in the air when he marked it
hence
we think

it was a goal
numpty

Well it it was that obvious then the review umpire is a cheat. I reckon it wasnt that obvious and the goal umpire didnt think it was a goal so he paid a mark.

[matrix]

Yes
Cheat


No goal line cameras in the first game for points internationally and the review actually needed it for sure.

Why the hell there wasn't the appropriate cameras there I'll have no idea

anyway I'm pretty sure the review cannot completely over rule the goal ump if the goal ump says its a mark I think but want to make sure he didn't juggle it over the line.
So the review ump is looking at two choices
Mark or point.
This is where it is just plain ludicrous as the goal ump was in wrong spot and had a bad view (tho not his fault)

[plugger66]

. Firstly SW complained about players blocking off the ball. I did not see one post last night on that and that is due to most of us watching on TV so we cant see the blocks. i did see hundreds of posts complaining about nearly every decision being wrong and the umpires are cheats because the AFl tell them to cheat.

Posted by me at 8:59 PM last night on the "Umpires are Cheats" thread

[No that was a fair contest. Riewoldt got blocked all night but not ne free kick. One block at a ball up in front of goal and guess what?

Keep protecting the umpires. Do you get a cut from their winnings?

. Sorry but i honestly dont think the umpires cheat and i certainly dont think the AFL tell them to cheat. before last night Sydney were near the bottom of frees so why would it just start against us?

I dont think they cheat either. The AFL should confirm this by checking the umpires bank accounts for any dodgey deposits. If the AFL directed them to cheat they would have done so for us last night to try and make it a better result for the New Zealand venture.

No I believe that because of lack of scrutiny and their incredibly huge ego's the umpires are just pathetically incompetent

Hopelessly and terminally so. And whose fault is that? Well in my opinion it is the AFL and Geischen for protecting the umpires so much they think they are part of the entertainment.

I pointed out LAST NIGHT Riewoldt was blocked all night, but who gets the blocking free to make sure the game is won by the Swans? Armstrong gets in the back when incorrect disposal of the ball, Steven or Ross (cant remember) gets incorrect disposal of the ball when it was exactly the same as Armstrong.

Swans get a 50 for Geary twitching and not being 5 cm's back, Swans kick the ball away AFTER the free given to Riewoldt - no 50.

The inconsistency and incompetence is laughable.

. And I didnt do any s*** last night apart disagree with people who IMO got the decisions wrong or called umpires cheats

BS -you make snide comments about people being on medication and more snide comments about not growing up with the game (inferring I shouldn't comment because, you know you obviously have a god given right to an opinion because you "grew up with the game"). You blatently call another poster a liar, even though he later stated he watched the game at a pub.

You tell people to watch with both eyes open (again inferring just because we support a team, we cant tell when decisions are right or wrong) and basically infer we are whingers.

But then the senior coach complains about the incompetence of the umpires selectively applying the rules and completely contradicts the

. i may not be the best umpire in the world, probably far from it, but I have done it for 25 years so have an idea about it.

couldn't care less. You are not an AFL umpire paid up to $100k a year. i would expect you to make errors. I even expect the umpires to make errors. But the cascade of incredibly one sided decisions I have seen this year is beyond the pale for such a professional sport.

. i dont question you on accounting because I reckon you would have a lot more idea than me on that subject.

So you umpire as a professional? Even so if my Accounting work was so inconsistent, and so incompetent that it was influencing outcomes so badly, I would expect to be critisised, and maybe even sanctioned. The client doing so would not have to get a "please explain" letter from me of have to pay a $10k fine for bring the profession into disrepute (even though it was me who had done so)

. Its funny but before Mark Fine started umpiring at Ormond he thought it was an easy job but he realises how difficult it is and not because you make mistakes but when you make a decision 50% of people think you are wrong.

I couldn't care less about amateur umpires. They do their best in competitions not tainted like the AFL. Where rules are for some but not others. Where the umpiring is supposed to be at the top level but is so inconsstent and incompetent that it is wrecking games.

So bad that the senior coach, who knows the AFL will come down on him like a tonne of bricks for even suggestion their goldne haired boys were not applying the rules, had to say something at the presser.

The umpires last night were disgraceful, and if you dont think they are incompetent, well something else has to explain such a one sided and biased performance.

So i hark back to my original suggestion. The AFL should be able to investigate the umpires bank accounts and make sure they haven't been getting kickbacks from bookies.

So P66 dont piss on my back and tell me its raining, if the umpires are not incompetent, they must be on the take, because their performance last night was a travesty for a so called professional sport.

JB first you started the name calling by calling a me atroll. As angry as you were I think you know i post pretty honest opinions about umpiring and whether they are good or bad. i then had a personal go at you but i wouldnt had you not called me a name. I also think if the umpiring was that bad SW would have mentioned more than just blocking. Only my opinion but i beleive it. I didnt see much wrong. The 3 things that seemed to have upset most people are the interchange decision, the goal and the last free to Mumford. The free to Mumford is 100% correct. the interchange I have no idea about but it is a basic rule so I would think the steward got it right. i hope so and the goal over the line. No ideas if it was a goal or not but with what they had to work with was never going to be paid a goal because the goal umpire said it wasnt. Glad you picked up on the blocking but most people i was discussing the topic with didnt mention it. And how do you know the umpires accounts arent looked at. The AFL can see players accounts so it stands to reason they may be able to see the umpires as well. I still say last nights game wasnt that badly umpired. Each to their own. we will probably never find out.

[matrix]

Big hug and a kiss lads
Then u can share a nice cold jug of cordie.



PS
Try hitting the enter key every now and then pluggsy

[plugger66]

Yes
Cheat


No goal line cameras in the first game for points internationally and the review actually needed it for sure.

Why the hell there wasn't the appropriate cameras there I'll have no idea

anyway I'm pretty sure the review cannot completely over rule the goal ump if the goal ump says its a mark I think but want to make sure he didn't juggle it over the line.
So the review ump is looking at two choices
Mark or point.
This is where it is just plain ludicrous as the goal ump was in wrong spot and had a bad view (tho not his fault)

No the review umpire can still say if it is a goal and yes there should be cameras on the line whether it is in NZ or Freo.

[plugger66]

Big hug and a kiss lads
Then u can share a nice cold jug of cordie.

We had a go at each other last night after both probably being pissed off we lost. Well I was. Today it is a sensible discussion. Well it is at the moment. This is when SS is at its best. the day after a game. maybe we should close it down the night of a loss.

[matrix]

Plenty of times a third decision should've came into it since the vid review came in and NOT once has a decision been given that goes against the goal umps thoughts.

They've brought it in like half the new rules and totally stuffed it.
excuse any crap spelling or grammar
On a phone.

[Trixilver]

Watch it here:

[stevie]

Watch it here:

First time I've seen the incident. If his hands are in bounds, then it's a mark. Doesn't matter that it passed through hands to chest, that irrelevant. This happens across boundary lines a fair bit and is always paid a mark, usually.

But why is there no side on footage? Surely that would be more conclusive.

Oh, and I hate these Shitney pricks more than any other team so I'm not sticking up for them, lol

[stinger]

Watch it here:

if you look at where he lands..and he was going more sideways than backwards at the time.....his first giant running step forward still lands behind the goal line......i originally said 2 -3 feet behind the line....make that over a metre.....

[plugger66]

Watch it here:

if you look at where he lands..and he was going more sideways than backwards at the time.....his first giant running step forward still lands behind the goal line......i originally said 2 -3 feet behind the line....make that over a metre.....

one foot is about 6 inches from the line.