Time to holster the score review system

The AFL’s score review system, implemented at the start of the 2012 season to reduce the amount of contentious scoring decisions with the use of goal-line technology, has been marred by poor camera angles, unclear footage and confusing interpretations.

At the start of the current season, the AFL trumpeted the improved speed and accuracy of the score review with an upgrade in technology.

Score reviewers would now be able to see multiple angles at once, instead of single angles in succession.

While this new system has marginally reduced the time to make a decision it’s hard to find evidence of the improved the accuracy.

The latest howler by the score review system occurred between Adelaide and Richmond in their tight game on Saturday night.

Late in the third quarter Rory Sloane roved the pack and snapped the ball, which took a bounce before heading between the posts for a goal. The goal umpire was in perfect position to make the call and adjudicated Sloane’s snap as a goal. The call was subsequently referred to the video reviewer for confirmation.

The footage showed no evidence to overturn the call, yet the reviewer, seemingly seeing what nobody else could, ruled the evidence conclusively showed the ball hitting the post and reversed the original decision.

A decision from the reviewer can only be made if the footage is conclusive. If the evidence is inconclusive, as most argue it was in the Sloane case, the goal umpire’s call must stand.

While the Sloane incident highlighted one problem with the score review system, it is not its only issue.

There are the times were the video evidence conclusively shows an obvious overturn, yet the reviewer rules the footage inconclusive and reverts back to the original incorrect call by the goal umpire.

An example of this is seen in a preseason match between the Dees and Suns. James Frawley’s long shot at goals is clearly punched through well before the goal-line but was ruled a goal by both the umpire and the reviewer.

In Round 12 this year, the AFL installed goalpost cameras at the MCG and Etihad Stadium. While a step forward for the system, they still have yet to prove as a vastly improved solution on their own.

In Round 14, Jack Ziebell’s goal was overturned by the reviewer, who ruled that his shot hit the post. The footage shows the ball clear the goal-line then cannon off Drew Petrie’s shoulder.

Yet despite the extra angle provided by the goal post cameras and mandate of conclusiveness, the reviewer still made the wrong decision and overturned the umpire call of a goal.

Having goalpost cameras in only two venues also means currently there are varying technologies at each venue and varying review outcomes as a result.

With the AFL bigwigs constantly preaching parity, it seems a strange decision to have such an uneven playing field with the score review system.

If goal post cameras were installed in Adelaide on the weekend, they likely would have shown the gap between ball and post for Sloan’s goal. Different broadcasters also have different camera setups for each match. Seven uses the camera on the goal umpire’s cap, while games covered by Fox do not.

Implementing a score review system was always going to be harder to implement for the AFL than for tennis or cricket.

A tennis court is much smaller and the play more confined, allowing for easier use of overhead cameras and predictive technology like Hawkeye, while cricket’s area for review is mainly confined to the wicket. These sports are streets ahead of the AFL in their score review systems.

While an efficient and effective score review system is ideal, the slapped-together manner which the AFL has implemented their system is more harmful than good.

The AFL need to stop using premiership season games as guinea pigs to iron out the kinks in the system.

Research into the best model for the score review system should be organised, along with investment into better camera angles and clearer footage for review.

Only when they believe they have an improved model which is fit for a professional sporting competition should it return.

If this cannot be done then just remove the system completely, for as it stands there are no improvements to accuracy of contentious decisions over goal umpire calls.