One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on July 28, 2012, 08:57:27 PM
-
The ball showed no signs of deflection nor did the vision show the ball was touched yet the idiot reviewer called it touched ::).
Sorry enough is enough. It's meant to be a professional sport but it's been officiated by amatuers. RFC needs to make a formal/public stand against the pathetic standard of umpiring. It's gone beyond a joke!
-
The umps are all in on it as are their families :banghead
-
Looked like the limpgots fingers bent back when Edwards kicked the goal
-
Yet again getting screwed over from the umps. Clearly looked like a goal.
-
Looked like the limpgots fingers bent back when Edwards kicked the goal
It did look like it, but surely that means it is inconclusive and umpires call.
-
Looked like the limpgots fingers bent back when Edwards kicked the goal
It did look like it, but surely that means it is inconclusive and umpires call.
Yep it was inconclusive. They aren't meant to guess because it feels right ::).
Game costing when the final margin is under a goal.
-
We're not good enough to win. If Judd had played we would have lost by 4 goals+ Sadly for us, we have a long long way to go and afew supposed big names like Jackie who is a complete disappointment atm.
-
We're not good enough to win. If Judd had played we would have lost by 4 goals+ Sadly for us, we have a long long way to go and afew supposed big names like Jackie who is a complete disappointment atm.
Ifs and Buts tho Ramps.. If we had a fit Vickery, Grimes or Griffiths?
Another case of when the game is to be won you need 22 players.. We consistantly play men down.. Adam Maric, Kelvin Moore could have played in the stands instead. McGuane was borderline OK.
GC and now Carlton.. Ordinary players stepping up to win games K.Hunt and now B.McLean... Our fringe players consistantly do nothing.
-
We dont have 22 players, at best we go into each weekend with about 15 or 16 and another 6 or 7 pretenders. :help
-
We dont have 22 players, at best we go into each weekend with about 15 or 16 and another 6 or 7 pretenders. :help
Exactly.
There lies our problem.
Hard to win games that are on the line when you have 14 players giving 110% ad the rest going at 35% with no ability.
Kelvin is finished. Nahas Might kick goals but gets 1 touch in every 20 inside50s..
-
It was touched.
BUT. This wasn't the issue.
The Carlton Betts goal was also touched. There was zero consistency
-
We dont have 22 players, at best we go into each weekend with about 15 or 16 and another 6 or 7 pretenders. :help
Exactly.
There lies our problem.
Hard to win games that are on the line when you have 14 players giving 110% ad the rest going at 35% with no ability.
Kelvin is finished. Nahas Might kick goals but gets 1 touch in every 20 inside50s..
Yep Cotch, Dusty and Lids can't do it all. Our bottom 6 especially with the outs we have are useless.
Still nothing to do with inconclusive vision overriding the goalumpire who originally called it a goal.
-
How on earth anyone watching from the stands or on television can conclusively say it was touched is beyond me. Every single replay from every single angle showed it was possible that Gibbs either touched the ball or Edwards leg, or completely missed everything and the one official in the prime position to adjudicate it said he was certain it was a goal. If you want some degree of certainty then watch Gibbs reaction as soon as the ball is kicked - he doesn't react until well after the event and this is from a serial whinger! He knew damn well he hadn't touched it and he only 'appealed' as an afterthought. The video review system officially lost a team the game tonight and it has demonstrated succinctly why the players and coaches are against it in it's current format.
-
This game is fast becoming a farce,
what about the 3 free kicks Murphy got in a row for "holding"
Interpretation varies from match to match let alone week to week, what about the one where houli took the ball and 1 second later andy collings slides into him front on, no free? Its a stuffing joke, they have ruined this game
-
what else could you expect with geishan the hut in charge?
-
TV presenter Matthew Richardson declares video review system ‘flawed'
Henry Hanlon
From: Herald Sun
July 30, 2012
THE video review system is under fire again after three contentious decisions in Saturday night's game between Carlton and Richmond.
Former Richmond player-cum-TV presenter Matthew Richardson declared the system flawed.
An Eddie Betts soccered goal at the 27-minute mark of the first quarter, Shane Edwards's soccered attempt near the end of the second quarter and Brock McLean's banana shot midway through the third were reviewed.
While Betts's soccer was given a goal, the other two were deemed touched.
With the exception of the first goal, the video review provided no noticeable outcome: cameras were unable to detect any touches. Richardson told 3AW listeners yesterday: "It seems to me now that it's being used for things that I don't think it was brought in for, and the technology simply is not up to scratch to be reviewing slight nicks of a finger on a ball. It's not up to scratch, it never will be, so don't have it."
Alex Rance was involved in the final incident, claiming he touched Brock McLean's shot, and while he backed the umpires he admitted the system wasn't ideal.
"I think the umpires are imperfect like all of us are and I think the review system is a little bit imperfect as well," Rance said on Channel 7's Game Day.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/tv-presenter-matthew-richardson-declares-video-review-system-flawed/story-e6frf9jf-1226438120278
-
Jeff Gieschen and It's Your Call host Wayne Schwass looked at the three reviews from Saturday night's Carlton-Richmond match, which involved Eddie Betts, Bryce Gibbs and Brock McLean.
"We are happy with what's trending," Gieschen said.
"In that game [Carlton versus Richmond], there were three and they were all close calls, all correct calls.
"Had we got any of those wrong, the result could have been different with a four-point ball game."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143279/default.aspx
-
Jeff Gieschen and It's Your Call host Wayne Schwass looked at the three reviews from Saturday night's Carlton-Richmond match, which involved Eddie Betts, Bryce Gibbs and Brock McLean.
"We are happy with what's trending," Gieschen said.
"In that game [Carlton versus Richmond], there were three and they were all close calls, all correct calls.
"Had we got any of those wrong, the result could have been different with a four-point ball game."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143279/default.aspx
:gobdrop
-
Jeff Gieschen and It's Your Call host Wayne Schwass looked at the three reviews from Saturday night's Carlton-Richmond match, which involved Eddie Betts, Bryce Gibbs and Brock McLean.
"We are happy with what's trending," Gieschen said.
"In that game [Carlton versus Richmond], there were three and they were all close calls, all correct calls.
"Had we got any of those wrong, the result could have been different with a four-point ball game."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143279/default.aspx
IDGAF who's reading this.
i HATE THIS DOG WITH A PASSION AND WANT TO BEAT HIS HEAD IN AND MAKE HIM A QUADRIPLEGIC
but id go to jail
-
lol'd at 'but id go to jail'
;D
-
And I thought it would have been a community servicr
-
Jeff Gieschen and It's Your Call host Wayne Schwass looked at the three reviews from Saturday night's Carlton-Richmond match, which involved Eddie Betts, Bryce Gibbs and Brock McLean.
"We are happy with what's trending," Gieschen said.
"In that game [Carlton versus Richmond], there were three and they were all close calls, all correct calls.
"Had we got any of those wrong, the result could have been different with a four-point ball game."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143279/default.aspx
:gobdrop
x2
"Had we got it wrong, the result could have been different with a four-point ball game."
No kidding
Got a newsflash for you Giesch, your mob got it wrong. The video was inconclusive, which means you are supposed to go with the call of the on field umpires
But at least it had no impact on the game :banghead
-
Keep up the good work Giesch you muppet.
(http://laamudiveandsurf.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/head-in-sand.jpg?w=474)