Collingwood’s Nick Maxwell can’t believe an umpiring decision during the AFL Round 19 match between the Geelong Cats and the Collingwood Magpies at the MCG, Melbourne.
Surely the time has come for the use of some form of video replay during a game to identify blatant goal umpire error. It’s only a matter of time before a decision influences the result of a big game or a final, or even a grand final.
Earlier this year I wrote about this exact issue on The Roar, suggesting the AFL must at the very least trial a video review system, and my opinion hasn’t changed.
I still can’t understand why they didn’t trial it last pre-season and I would now be amazed and somewhat bemused if they didn’t implement video technology this pre-season.
There were four separate incidents from the weekend alone that were incorrectly adjudicated.
The most glaring was on Saturday night in the Geelong vs Collingwood game when Shannon Byrnes ran into an open goal, got boot to ball before his foot crossed the line but was incorrectly denied a goal.
Now the umpire was in the perfect position and the video replay clearly showed it should have been a goal, but he still missed it.
However, when Channel 10 replayed the incident again in real time from side on, it showed just how tough it is to make a split second call.
They need assistance.
Fremantle’s David Mundy was awarded a goal from a ball that clearly hit the post against North Melbourne.
Jarrad Waite had a goal disallowed against Essendon when the replay showed he did in fact connect with the ball in the goal square.
While Bomber Jay Neagle kicked truly from only 20 metres out but the goal umpire denied him a goal believing the ball had in fact missed.
Collingwood coach Mick Malthouse has called for the introduction of a video replay or referral system.
“I think it is time that there is an aid to help the goal umpires,” he said.
“The goal umpires are under massive pressure – they don’t get a second go at it and the way that ball moves at times it doesn’t give you a lot of breathing space.”
Many believe the ‘referral umpire’ will take too long to reach a decision and any such technology will slow the game down too much.
It does raise the question of how long would we be willing to wait if we did have video technology?
90 seconds is far too long, but 30 seconds or under would work well and hardly interrupt the game. Surely modern technology has come far enough to develop a way to get the results quickly.
“I think people would rather that extra 10 to 15 seconds delay and see something right than not see something right.” Malthouse said
I can understand the opposition to it but then again, the thought of two goal umpires as an option or alternative just doesn’t sit comfortably with me either.
Maybe it’s the romance of 100 years of history or even just aesthetically what it would look like, but I’d rather we roll on video than more umpires.
Interestingly Geelong Coach Mark Thompson believes we already have too many officials and the technology would be a waste of money
“There are a lot of people employed by footy. How much is this going to cost the game?” he said after the loss.
It’s a fine balance between human error and making the right decision, of course umpires are going to make mistakes, and they do each and every week, but monetary costs aside, how long is it going to be until the AFL pays the ultimate price for an error in a grand final?
Of course the irony in all of this is a field umpire can easily make a wrong decision in front of goal and cost a team victory anyway.
Brisbane’s Jonathan Brown kicked the winning goal on Saturday night against West Coast with only seconds remaining. Many would argue the umpire completely missed an obvious free kick for a push in the back that would have in fact denied Brown the goal and the Lions victory.
But while there’s no replay or video referee that can change a decision from the field umpires, lets at least make sure the goal umpires get it right and introduce video technology to assist them.
Bayman
Guest
All things considered I'd rather have the odd goal umpire howler than the continuing confusion over the rules as illustrated each week by the three wise men in control of the game. For some reason, and it absolutely escapes me, the AFL and it's umpiring friends seemingly have no concern at all that many of the commentators have no idea why a free has been paid. These commentators, apparently, are meant to be experts but clearly they have been left behind by the Giesch and his cohorts. Why is it so? And why to we tolerate it? It strikes me as odd that the only people who seem to know the rules are the umpires. Given many of the club officials, fans and media have watched the game for forty or fifty years but now have no clue I find it strange that the AFL does not. Find it strange, that is. Something has happened to the game but nobody is telling us. Perhaps the umpiring fraternity see this as an advantage. It's hard to be criticised when the accuser has no idea what's going on. The goal umpiring mistakes are jumped on only because the masses can clearly see a mistake was made. Field umpiring is a different art altogether. It must be art because it sure as hell isn't science. Mind you, the umpires today have achieved a sort of "umpiring nirvana". Never before in the history of the game have umpires, and their decisions, so influenced the result of matches. There's always been the odd controversial decision (Wayne Harmes tap back - from out of bounds - to Sheldon in the goal square in the 1979 GF) but never before so many on a single afternoon, or evening. A personal favourite, who can forget three consecutive 50 metre penalties against Barry Hall last year. All thoroughly justified by the Giesch, all as a result of poor umpiring and a desire to grandstand from the maggot. And that's just one example. As Churchill might have said, "Never before in the history of footy conflict have so many been so confused, and so many results so influenced, by so few" The last thing this game needs is more video coverage. Or, God forbid, more umpires! P.S. As davelee says above, what happens if the two goal umpires disagree. Presumably, in the Byrnes example, that goal umpire would still have said Byrnes was over the line. It all sounds easy when you say it quickly but I see another can of worms coming our way.
Black Diamonds
Guest
Why is it unfair? If you're stupid enough to use your challenge when you're not sure if its right you don't deserve to get another challenge.
davelee
Guest
if theyre going to tackle the issue, theyve gotta resolve it. not sure 2 umpires wouldve solved the problem with byrnes' goal. in fact i think it could create more problems, especially if the goal umps don't agree.
Mega
Guest
Challenges are too complicated and then it's unfair if you use up your challenge and then there is another bad call.
Mathew
Guest
I liked Brian Taylor's idea of a challenge system. It solves the problem of holding up the game. "Under Taylor's proposal teams would be given one challenge per match, which would be preserved if they challenged successfully but would result in a free kick to the opposition in the middle of the ground if unsuccessful." full article here: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/challenge-system-call-for-goals-20100808-11q8w.html
Doughboy
Guest
Nah, leave it alone. I reckon it all evens out in the end. And I didn't see the Brown mark as a free kick at all. It's all subjective, still is on video.
Mega
Guest
I agree but video isn't always accurate. AFL is all about non-stop play. Video technology may slow it too much for fans liking.