It’s hard to believe, but a controversial umpiring decision late in Sunday’s match between Port Adelaide and Essendon has somehow managed to provoke calls for the use of video refs in the AFL.

The incident in question was Alwyn Davey’s shot on goal that was awarded a rushed behind.

The Bomber forward’s mid-air soccer dumbfounded the goal umpire, as he had not been able to establish whether or not a Port defender had a hand to the ball at the time it was kicked.

The field umpire was similarly clueless, so then it was up to the two boundary umpires. The first couldn’t tell but the second had a bit more of a look.

“It was off the foot so it’s close,” was what we heard through the umpire mike. “I didn’t see it touched. It’s very close though … very close.”

And with that inconclusiveness, the lesser of the two scores was given _ a rushed behind.

Herald Sun journo Mark Stevens came out this week and urged the AFL to consider the use of video refs because of the incident, calling it “a glaring example of why the AFL needs to fall into line with the NRL.”

It’s a natural reaction to look to technology for assistance when a call can’t be categorically made on the field of play.

However, in this instance, Stevens has missed the mark.

First of all, the video of Sunday’s incident also happened to be inconclusive. Watching the tape provided no clearer vision of whether or not the ball was touched than what any umpire on the field could see.

I can bet that comments like “I didn’t see it touched. It’s very close though…” were replicated by many fans sitting at home.

So even if we did have a video ref in this situation, it wouldn’t have changed the end result at all.

Another fact omitted, in the wake of high praise for the NRL system, was that the NRL are this year cutting back the number of video ref referrals.

Instead, an extra referee has been deployed on the field to help speed up the decision-making process. So far, the concept has been hailed as a success.

It sounds more like the NRL are looking to fall into line with the AFL than the other way around.

Sure, turning to technology can often seem like an appropriate cause of action. However it has no place in the AFL.

The league are ramping up their attempts to speed up the game, and halting it for decisions that seem more than adequately handled on the field would fly in the face of this.

It would take longer for a video ref to review an incident than it takes four umpires on the field.

And, of course, in how many instances would the technology actually be effective?

It certainly wouldn’t have been on Sunday. How many other cases are there where it is possible to review a play (such as once there is a stoppage in play) that there is significant enough doubt to warrant the use of a video ref?

We certainly don’t hear about these types of incidents every weekend.

In an ideal world, there would never be any doubt over close calls. But in reality, we have to find the most efficient way of dealing with these calls.

The most efficient way, it seems, was how the umpires handled things on Sunday.

Follow Michael on twitter @mdifabrizio

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.