Seriously anchor, even Lyon said he thought it would of been a goal, take ya blinkers off & look from an even point of view, be different if it was against freo.. Imagine if that decision was in a final!!
Never been to an Eagles game then Unka.I can remember them booing Trent Croad when he played against them afte he returned to Hawthorn,Work that one out.
[/quote]
mate i have msny questions to many fans who frequent subi oval.
Would still be the correct decision no matter what game it was.
Read the rules and see.
You are probably the only person on this planet to not think it would of been a goal.. Say no more. Did you not see Healy & King demonstrate the correct way to goal umpire which will more than likely be introduced in coming weeks!
Vickery ??? wasn’t he the bloke who had fresh airie, at the kick at goal. In case you not know about goal umpiring to straddle the line for shots like that is a direction they are given, so cannot blame the goalie, just doing as he is told, but agree that should not step into the field of play
The goal umpire WAS in the correct position for what happened.He was working to the rules.After the ball hit him it was still in play.The correct decision was made.You can yell, scream, rant rave, do what ever make what ever excuses,but the simple fact is that the right decision was made.think what you like the goal umpire got it right.
It is the process that is wrong.It is the way the AFL have instructed the goal umpires to act that may be wrong.Let the tigers think they have been hard done by,but the right decision was made.
I am not sure who you talk to about football,but most of my friend and others I have spoken to say basically the same as me.The WHOLE ball had not gone over cvompletely over the line.
The correct decision was not made, even the AFL have come out & said it was the wrong decision & it should of been reviewed. Why do goal umps need to be in the field of play anyway?
http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/richmond-coach-labels-umpires-failure-to-call-for-goal-review-late-against-dockers-a-joke/story-e6frf3e3-1226630620387
Once again we have the inane discussion about goal umpires and their supposed impact on the result.
The first point he was in the correct position according to the goal umpires’ guidelines.
The second point is for all those people who make a comment about whether it was a goal or not and whether it should have been reviewed would they like to go through the many, many decisions where a free kick was paid incorrectly or not paid in the forward line by the field umpires in that same match. When it comes to whether a goal umpire’s mistake or the many field umpires’ mistakes have a greater impact on the results of games I know which one I would pick. To provide evidence to support my position in the Swan Districts versus Peel game Lammie was penalised for a throw in the back line folowing a stoppage. It is my understanding that the umpires’ department have informed Swans that it was the incorrect decision. Remarkably given that we have been told that umpires don’t guess the umpire who was incapable of determining whether it was a throw or a hand pass umpired league the following week.
Why there is this unfathomable outbreak of indignation with respect to goal umpiring and yet field umpires are immune from any criticism is beyond me.
Also, surely the Richmond player’s mistake is many, many times more significant.
Swan if the ump was in the correct position the ball would not of hit him.
From Anchorman:
According to the AFL he was in the correct position.
Nobody could say for sure if the ball had passed completely over the white line.If it hadn’t then then correct call was made.Not evn a revue would have convinced any on that it was a goal.The rule states that if the ball hits the umpire and stays in play then it is play on.A correct decision was made.
Absolutely right, the goal ump was exactly where he had been instructed to be, the ball never crossed the line, it hit the ump and stayed in play - play on! Would it have been a goal if it didn’t hit the umpire, probably it would have, we will never know.
Obviously the position that the umpire was in wasn’t ideal for the situation, not sure a camera would have made it much more clear. Richmond were very unlucky as it turns out.
Terror whether you think he was in the wrong position, at the time he was umpiring he was following instructions as to where he should be standing. Whether there is a change or not to where they should stand does not in any way make a scintilla of difference to the match.
Goal umpire mistakes are so few compared to the plethora of field umpiring mistakes each match which directly affect many, many matches.
Unlucky insofaras the Richmond made a mistake by not trying to mark the ball or kick it over the line.
Terror check out he AFL web site and see what Geishan the umpires man has to say.All the crap about the AFL saying they got it wrong is just that CRAP.Maybe they got it wrong by not reviewing the decision but that is all.There is nothing,zip,zero,nada nought etc to say that Richmond were robbed of a goal.The correct decision was made,
FULL STOP.
SERIOUSLY a/man, if you hold ANY credence to ANYTHING that spews out of Gieshan says, i do indeed have concerns for you logic.
Didn’t watch the game anchor coz neither team interests me, but saw the ‘event’ a few times. Put whatever Freo slant on it that you want, but it really does appear that Richmond was robbed at the worst and there should have been a review at the least.
Maybe you don’t like Geishan,but he is working from the rules.He is right, the umpire was right.The rules are the rules.
Shark how do you work out that the Tigers were robbed.There is no conclusive proof that the ball crossed the line, or was ever going to cross the line.
Said it before I will say it again and again and again,the right decision was made every fday or night of the week including last Friday night.
Anchor I agree with you in relation to the goal umpire. when the ball hits any umpire, they are regarded as invisible so the ball goes where it goes,so in that instance the correct ruling was made. A video replay would not have shed any further light on it, I wouldn’t have thought (does the replay shed light on any decision?) I was more interested in Steven Hills action of rushing a behind under no pressure and the ruling as to whether that should have been deliberate?
mike do you not think the umpire obstructed a certain scoring result from his stupid positioning?
Terror how about the push in the back that McPharlin received in the last quarter which was not paid? Instead the Richmond player was awarded a mark and directly resulted in a Richmond goal. Also, why wasn’t a 50 metre penalty paid when the Richmond played transgressed over the mark in the last quarter?
Neither incorrect decision was maade by a goal umpire; they were made by field umpire(s). So far we have two incorrect decisions by field umpires compared to, a tenuous at best, mistake by the goal umpire.
If you care to go through the entire match you will find a number of other field umpiring errors which would have had the potential to change the scores of both teams.
How many of those saying it should be reviewed suggest that the video shows the ball clearly crossed the line.
How about the Barlow kick from the back pocket.The ball didn’t even come back into play, should that not have been brought back and Barlow made to retake the kick!!!
A lot of decisions were made and are made every game some good some bad.Listening to 360 last night they were adamant that the right decision was made.
But I guess we all see what we want to see,or judge how we want to judge.It seems to me that from what I have heard and seen the majority think the decision was right.Maybe they AFL needs to correct the way the goal umpires position themselves in future,but as were the rules on Friday night the correct decision was made.
So Unka does that mean that the Selwood goal on the weekend shouldn’t have been allowed as well!!!I don’t think that went to review either did it.From what I saw he plainly missed the ball.