« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Edwards goal that wasn't  (Read 4371 times)

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 58597
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Edwards goal that wasn't
« 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!

Logged
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Dubstep Dookie

  • Guest
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2012, 08:58:34 PM »
The umps are all in on it as are their families  :banghead
Logged

Offline yellowandback

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4025
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2012, 09:01:10 PM »
Looked like the limpgots fingers bent back when Edwards kicked the goal
Logged
It's that simple Spud
"I discussed (it) with my three daughters, my wife and my 82-year-old mum, because it has really affected me … If those comments … were made about one of my daughters, it would make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I would not have liked it at all.”

Offline drewturner

  • Tiger Rookie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Premiership 11
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #3 on: July 28, 2012, 09:03:04 PM »
Yet again getting screwed over from the umps. Clearly looked like a goal.
Logged

Offline wayne

  • Fame of Hall
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8464
  • In Absentia
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2012, 09:07:23 PM »
Quote from: yellowandback on July 28, 2012, 09:01:10 PM
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.
Logged
And you may not think I care for you
When you know down inside that I really do

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 58597
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #5 on: July 28, 2012, 10:33:12 PM »
Quote from: wayne on July 28, 2012, 09:07:23 PM
Quote from: yellowandback on July 28, 2012, 09:01:10 PM
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.
Logged
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

10 FLAGS

  • Guest
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2012, 10:34:57 PM »
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.
Logged

Offline TigerLand

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5721
  • I <3 Mrs Hardwick
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #7 on: July 28, 2012, 10:38:09 PM »
Quote from: 10 FLAGS on July 28, 2012, 10:34:57 PM
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.
Logged
Go Tigers!

10 FLAGS

  • Guest
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #8 on: July 28, 2012, 10:40:09 PM »
We dont have 22 players, at best we go into each weekend with about 15 or 16 and another 6 or 7 pretenders. :help
Logged

Offline TigerLand

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5721
  • I <3 Mrs Hardwick
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #9 on: July 28, 2012, 10:44:31 PM »
Quote from: 10 FLAGS on July 28, 2012, 10:40:09 PM
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..
Logged
Go Tigers!

Offline Damo

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4499
  • Member of famed “Gang Of Four”. Ground the airbus!
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2012, 10:49:30 PM »
It was touched.

BUT. This wasn't the issue.

The Carlton Betts goal was also touched. There was zero consistency
Logged

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 58597
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2012, 10:59:19 PM »
Quote from: Popelord on July 28, 2012, 10:44:31 PM
Quote from: 10 FLAGS on July 28, 2012, 10:40:09 PM
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.
Logged
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2012, 11:05:11 PM »
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.
Logged

tony_montana

  • Guest
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2012, 11:08:36 PM »
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
Logged

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: Edwards goal that wasn't
« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2012, 11:10:48 PM »
what else could you expect with geishan the hut in charge?
Logged
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »