MIA: The Rule Book

[Go Richo 12]

If it happened the other way around would you still hold the same view, Jack?

[Jackstar 1960]

If it happened the other way around would you still hold the same view, Jack?

Yes
As I believe the current rule is incorrect
Please refer to LBW rule in cricket
Needs to be 100%
Not 95% and saw the little pinkie flapping in the wind
Seriously

[Jackstar 1960]

I have no issue with umpires calling for a review
I have huge issues with technology taking over and making decisions when 3 employed umpires within 20 metres didn't see a thing
Either did 96% per cent of the players
Watch the replay
Phil Davis was claiming he touched it , he wasn't within 6 inches
And we know players tell lies
Watched West Coast and Bombers yesterday, Daniher kicks a goal and three west Coast players run around tapping there wrists
Please spare me
Let the umpires umpire
They miss decisions each week re holding the ball etc

[Owl]

We are all angry but that was touched Jack.  Fingers don't bend back like that naturally without help.  The players should of waited for the replay before running to the centre and we should ban all goal celebrations so they can keep focused on the game.  Celebrate wins not goals.

[Owl]

Yes they certainly do "miss" a lot of things, many at crucial stages of games imo. 

[Simonator]

I think jack knows the ball was touched but he just thinks if the umpires don't call it then they decision should be left st that. But I bet if it was the other way around with Richmond smothering a game saving goal,  he would be saying it was the right call. It's tough, but it will help us win games as well

[Jackstar 1960]

We are all angry but that was touched Jack.  Fingers don't bend back like that naturally without help.  The players should of waited for the replay before running to the centre and we should ban all goal celebrations so they can keep focused on the game.  Celebrate wins not goals.

I ain't angry at all
All I am saying is the review system they have is wrong
I refer back again to the cricket system with LBW review
It can be hitting the leg stump and not be given out
Also I have no issues with umpires calling for reviews , why didn't it happen here ?

[Jackstar 1960]

I think jack knows the ball was touched but he just thinks if the umpires don't call it then they decision should be left st that. But I bet if it was the other way around with Richmond smothering a game saving goal,  he would be saying it was the right call. It's tough, but it will help us win games as well

Whether the ball was touched or not
Why wasn't it reviewed by the umpires on the ground ?
There was one umpire boundary side and one in the corridor who gave all clear
And most of the players didn't argue either
It's not thatyou had 18 GWS players going off there head , only two players , one who was trying to cheat and the other who had his pinkie touched

Seriously

[Simonator]

They obviously missed it that's why it wasn't reviewed. The review system only reviews goals right, not tackles or deliberates or other things. That's why when the umpire missed it the folks upstairs reviewed it and called it back and the decision was right. As subtle as it may be, it was right.
Is your point that umpires are crap for missing it or do you think they should no my review it after he umpires call?

[YellowandBlackBlood]

As I've stated, I don't mind the video review. What I don't like is why the "video umpire" doesn't recall obvious clangers by the umpires. Jeremy Cameron encroaches 3 metres over the mark and the video ump isn't allowed to tell the field umps it's a 50m penalty. Even Melbourne's Michael Hibberd was pinged for a deliberate out of bounds by the field umpire when it was clearly a smothered handball by the North player. Why can't the video ump call in obvious mistakes that could alter the outcome of a game? If they want to use technology, use it. Why be selective? If they don't want to use it, don't use it at all.

[MintOnLamb]

As I've stated, I don't mind the video review. What I don't like is why the "video umpire" doesn't recall obvious clangers by the umpires. Jeremy Cameron encroaches 3 metres over the mark and the video ump isn't allowed to tell the field umps it's a 50m penalty. Even Melbourne's Michael Hibberd was pinged for a deliberate out of bounds by the field umpire when it was clearly a smothered handball by the North player. Why can't the video ump call in obvious mistakes that could alter the outcome of a game? If they want to use technology, use it. Why be selective? If they don't want to use it, don't use it at all.

Exactly, an absolute disgrace.

If it was a goal to Shai we had to flood the backline which our players were in the process of doing, when the ball went back to the GWS for a kick in we didn't have time to set up the correct defensive structure.

It could only happen to RFC. Fingered again

[(•))(©™]

Was it touched ??

[Chuck17]

According to everyone but Jackstar yes.

A bit like the Hammer is great debate.

[Jackstar 1960]

Was it touched ??

90% yes ( although Martin Flanagan and others say it should of been a goal )
But not conclusive
Similar to LBW review at the cricket
E.g. Has to hit middle stump to be out , leg stump not out

[Go Richo 12]

Was it touched ??

90% yes ( although Martin Flanagan and others say it should of been a goal )
But not conclusive
Similar to LBW review at the cricket
E.g. Has to hit middle stump to be out , leg stump not out

Sorry Jack but i don't know why you keep bringing up the cricket analogy.

For a start, LBW's use video, ball tracking and snicko technology. Also, 51% of the ball needs to hitting any stump, not just leg stump and it only needs to be 1% of the ball if the original umpires call was out.

Either way, the ball was clearly touched. I am more peeed off at the 50 not being paid and our chances we did not take. The touched ball review would not have people moaning and groaning if it happened in the first five minutes of the game.