Hardwick's post-match media conference / Dimma blasts slow score review system

[one-eyed]

Dimma's post-match presser:

VIDEO: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/2018-04-29/round-6-hardwick-postmatch

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hardwick blasts slow score review system

Dinny Navaratnam
afl.com.au
Apr 29, 2018 8:51PM

PREMIERSHIP coach Damien Hardwick has blasted the score review system, after it came under fire twice in Sunday's 43-point win against Collingwood.

A Josh Caddy shot from the boundary at the MCG in the second quarter was called a goal by the umpire but was then overturned.

Caddy admitted to Melbourne radio station SEN after the game the ball was "obviously" touched off his right boot.

However, only Lynden Dunn's attempt to slap it through was shown at the ground.

Goal review decisions are made in a bunker under Etihad Stadium, where all broadcast angles at a game are shown on multiple screens.

That number varies: it's at least seven for lower drawing matches but is well into the double digits for the Grand Final.

Hardwick was asked after the game about whether the decision to award Jack Higgins a second shot on goal after he was decked by Lynden Dunn in the first quarter was correct, but he quickly changed the topic.

"It's a bit like the score reviews at the moment, we don't really want to see them either. I still can't figure them out," Hardwick said.

After round three, AFL football operations manager Steve Hocking said the process would be looked at so it could be shortened to 15-20 seconds.

Hardwick was perplexed with the call on Caddy's shot.

"I couldn't see how you would overturn it," Hardwick said.

"My theory is let the goal umpire make the decision. Ball goes back to the centre bounce. If they can decide in that time that it's touched, then change it.

"Even the second one with Jack (Riewoldt), it's like well, why are we waiting around for something that's obviously taking so long to make a decision on? Just throw it up. We're looking at fingernails, for god's sake. I can't understand it.

"I found it frustrating in the box too because we can't see it. People are asking us 'Did you see it? Can you see it?'. We've got no reply at all so I'm not sure what they're looking at."

The length of the review continues to concern Hardwick.

"It takes too long. It destroys the momentum of the game. People are perplexed. I don't know about you blokes but I don't know how they overturned that," Hardwick said.

He referred to an example from May last year, when Tiger Shai Bolton's snap late in a tight game was originally called a goal before being deemed as touched. Jeremy Cameron responded with a goal 90 seconds later to give GWS the victory.

"It's the Shai Bolton example from last year. The ball goes back to the centre bounce and then all of a sudden, we're waiting around for 45 seconds," Hardwick said.

"Figure it out. It's not hard.

"Vent over."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-04-29/hardwick-blasts-slow-score-review-system

[the claw]

what a storm in a tea cup. It took time because the review had to look at two possible touches of the ball. You can clearly hear the ump say to another ump look at both.

[The Machine]

The reviews are not conclusive thus should not be used until better technology becomes available.....it's 

[YellowandBlackBlood]

what a storm in a tea cup. It took time because the review had to look at two possible touches of the ball. You can clearly hear the ump say to another ump look at both.

That is not the rule.

The rules are that if a review is not called, the ball is taken and bounced in the centre. If the reviewer cannot come to a conclusion in that time, it is a goal. On this occasion the field umpires waited. That is not what the rules state.

[the claw]

what a storm in a tea cup. It took time because the review had to look at two possible touches of the ball. You can clearly hear the ump say to another ump look at both.

That is not the rule.

The rules are that if a review is not called, the ball is taken and bounced in the centre. If the reviewer cannot come to a conclusion in that time, it is a goal. On this occasion the field umpires waited. That is not what the rules state.

But a review was called on both touches.
Umpire Chelsea to field ump #1 I think its a goal but i want to check if it was touched. Field ump #2 comes in and says i think it was touched off the boot and field ump #1 says okay check for both. Seems to me the system worked as it should.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

what a storm in a tea cup. It took time because the review had to look at two possible touches of the ball. You can clearly hear the ump say to another ump look at both.

That is not the rule.

The rules are that if a review is not called, the ball is taken and bounced in the centre. If the reviewer cannot come to a conclusion in that time, it is a goal. On this occasion the field umpires waited. That is not what the rules state.

But a review was called on both touches.
Umpire Chelsea to field ump #1 I think its a goal but i want to check if it was touched. Field ump #2 comes in and says i think it was touched off the boot and field ump #1 says okay check for both. Seems to me the system worked as it should.

are we talking about the Riewoldt goal? There was no review called. The umpire gave the goal and the ball was taken to the centre. At the ground the all clear had been given. The goal was added to the score. When a review is called there is no all clear given.

[the claw]

what a storm in a tea cup. It took time because the review had to look at two possible touches of the ball. You can clearly hear the ump say to another ump look at both.

That is not the rule.

The rules are that if a review is not called, the ball is taken and bounced in the centre. If the reviewer cannot come to a conclusion in that time, it is a goal. On this occasion the field umpires waited. That is not what the rules state.

But a review was called on both touches.
Umpire Chelsea to field ump #1 I think its a goal but i want to check if it was touched. Field ump #2 comes in and says i think it was touched off the boot and field ump #1 says okay check for both. Seems to me the system worked as it should.

are we talking about the Riewoldt goal? There was no review called. The umpire gave the goal and the ball was taken to the centre. At the ground the all clear had been given. The goal was added to the score. When a review is called there is no all clear given.

I thought you were talking about the Caddy review this thread and the other thread.

At the end of the day with JR it may have been the wrong process but the right decion was reached imo.All of our rules are open to the umps to intervene like it or not.It really high time we set some rules in black and white but until that happens we get threads like this.