Unofficial Preview Changes v Hawks Round 11

[Dalions]

Ever wondered how Fox Footy with a young green journo who basically knows zilch is able to highlight one incident that was completely unnoticed by the crowd or anyone on the field and put it up 10 minutes after the game and nail the suspension and set it up as a talking point ?

They do it every week. These journos just aren't that prepared or savvy of the game to be able to pinpoint a triviality out of 120 minutes of footy.

It's fed to them.

The commentators of the game on Channel 7 brought it up as it happened, basically suggesting that the free kick should have been the other way around.
And that the incident will likely be looked at.

 

[martinson]

Just on that point that same dumb young journo was telling everyone that Rankine had run too far and setting up the narrative that the AFL ran with subsequently. He was so stupid he said Rankine had run 24 metres ,that's right 24 metres, and the talking heads taking his feed never even picked him up on it.

You'd love some independent thinkers occasionally wouldn't you.

 

[martinson]

The commentators of the game on Channel 7 brought it up as it happened, basically suggesting that the free kick should have been the other way around.
And that the incident will likely be looked at.

Didn't see that.

OK . Then maybe it was out there already.

 

[buttermuffs]

Just on that point that same dumb young journo was telling everyone that Rankine had run too far and setting up the narrative that the AFL ran with subsequently. He was so stupid he said Rankine had run 24 metres ,that's right 24 metres, and the talking heads taking his feed never even picked him up on it.

You'd love some independent thinkers occasionally wouldn't you.

But he did run 24 metres? Like they measured it.

 

[McIvor]

Just on that point that same dumb young journo was telling everyone that Rankine had run too far and setting up the narrative that the AFL ran with subsequently. He was so stupid he said Rankine had run 24 metres ,that's right 24 metres, and the talking heads taking his feed never even picked him up on it.

You'd love some independent thinkers occasionally wouldn't you.

The AFL are deadset propaganda merchants for whatever narrative they choose and good luck if you dare question anything given they’ll just pull your accreditation. Not directed at you, but tell me I’m wrong.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

But he did run 24 metres? Like they measured it.

The grounds are all georeferenced as part of the TV coverage. It's relatively easy for them to measure reasonably precise distances.

 

[martinson]

But he did run 24 metres? Like they measured it.

Not possible.

I'm questioning their measurements.

It was like 11 steps after he bounced it. 2metres is a very big step despite what I read elsewhere here . The steps aren't uniform either. It looked maybe 12-15m to me

 

[martinson]

The grounds are all georeferenced as part of the TV coverage. It's relatively easy for them to measure reasonably precise distances.

Just can't see that that was 24 metres after the bounce. The goal square is 10m. 2.5 goal squares ??

 

[teacherpants]

This shows it pretty well, was absolutely taking the proverbial:

 

[The Flying Belgian]

Just can't see that that was 24 metres after the bounce. The goal square is 10m. 2.5 goal squares ??

I didn't see the report, so I don't know if they just guessed or used the technology available to them. I did hear once that the squares mown into the grass on the ovals are a specific difference (10m maybe).

What shits me most is not pulling up every other instance of players runnings too far, kicks travelling less than 15m, etc. But guess what, umpires make mistakes, just ****ing live with it. They just do it on the coverage to drive content on the foxsports website. The great unwashed love a good umpire bash. Meanwhile, junior comps are struggling to get umpires because they get abused by nuffies who get validated by bullshit like this.

 

[martinson]

I didn't see the report, so I don't know if they just guessed or used the technology available to them. I did hear once that the squares mown into the grass on the ovals are a specific difference (10m maybe).

What shits me most is not pulling up every other instance of players runnings too far, kicks travelling less than 15m, etc. But guess what, umpires make mistakes, just ******* live with it. They just do it on the coverage to drive content on the foxsports website. The great unwashed love a good umpire bash. Meanwhile, junior comps are struggling to get umpires because they get abused by nuffies who get validated by bullshit like this.

I'm not into umpire bashing either and don't want to single out an ump who's probably doing the right thing in his own mind.

But to pull that out at that stage of the game when tbh it was totally conjectural seemed really odd in the context of the number of times you see players run further than that every week.

Likewise the tiddly 9-10m kicks do my head in.

 

[buttermuffs]

Not possible.

I'm questioning their measurements.

It was like 11 steps after he bounced it. 2metres is a very big step despite what I read elsewhere here . The steps aren't uniform either. It looked maybe 12-15m to me

This is insane. It was clearly too far. People are annoyed because it happens a lot but is never consistently picked up. Good example is Sharp running 22 metres and not being penalised and probably ran another 20 after that.

 

[martinson]

This is insane. It was clearly too far. People are annoyed because it happens a lot but is never consistently picked up. Good example is Sharp running 22 metres and not being penalised and probably ran another 20 after that.

42m ?

 

[The Flying Belgian]

But to pull that out at that stage of the game when tbh it was totally conjectural seemed really odd in the context of the number of times you see players run further than that every week.

Absolutely, but again... Umpires makes mistakes. Always have, always will.

 

[martinson]

Absolutely, but again... Umpires makes mistakes. Always have, always will.

Well the narrative is it wasn't a mistake . So if that's the case and the application of the rule is strict then the AFL should instruct the umps to apply it like that every time.

But by saying the call was correct and then not ensuring it's applied every other time is the reason why supporters get frustrated and in the end the umps bear the brunt of the criticism.

 

[BuntonRules]

The players GPS should be like a dog training collar. Give them an electric shock when they exceed 15 metres. That will solve the problem

 

[The Flying Belgian]

Well the narrative is it wasn't a mistake . So if that's the case and the application of the rule is strict then the AFL should instruct the umps to apply it like that every time.

But by saying the call was correct and then not ensuring it's applied every other time is the reason why supporters get frustrated and in the end the umps bear the brunt of the criticism.

Agreed. The mistake is they don't call it all the time. I'm a big advocate in actuallay applying the rules that have been laid down, rather than ignoring/downplaying some because their bosses want the game to flow. I still maintain more free kicks would open the game up more.

 

[Nunez]

Seems to me making it 15 steps instead of 15 metres simplifies it for everyone. Impossible for umpires to accurately judge 15m constantly given everyone has different stride lengths etc. Set up to fail.

 

[Nathan Barley]

Seems to me making it 15 steps instead of 15 metres simplifies it for everyone. Impossible for umpires to accurately judge 15m constantly given everyone has different stride lengths etc. Set up to fail.

What about for marks?

 

[Dalions]

Seems to me making it 15 steps instead of 15 metres simplifies it for everyone. Impossible for umpires to accurately judge 15m constantly given everyone has different stride lengths etc. Set up to fail.

Do we seriously expect an umpire to count everyone’s steps?
Personally I think it’s much easier to judge 15m.
And with some of the 10 and 12m marks that are paid a lot more people should be pinged for running too far,
It appears to be something that they have relaxed over the years.
Only to pull it out in a big game when it advantages a Big VIC Club

 

[Miluxx]

I come here to ask if Brandon Ryan might be a chance to replace hipwood. But I'd swear I'm in the wrong thread.

 

[Nathan Barley]

I come here to ask if Brandon Ryan might be a chance to replace hipwood. But I'd swear I'm in the wrong thread.

He's only kicked 2 goals in his last 4 games so would come in completely out of form

Shame HSmith has been injured but I'd go with Fort

 

[Kernel Kurtz]

Yep, no way you could move Jarrod Berry from the role he has been playing the last month or so, he has been very good.

On another note I just finished watching the game again and gee Harry Sharp and Callum Ah Chee did a mountain of running up and down the ground, both continually popped up helping out in the D50.

Those two are one of the reasons why we are looking like a different team , but it would be a crime not to put Lohmann in that group as well.
There run both ways have changed us, and for this reason I would not bring Zac in atm, unless Rayner makes way for him and that an't happening.
But that is the only way I see Zac improving us atm.
Things can change quicklky and we might see Zac is required.
But I wouldn't be upset if he didn't come in and was told to watch these three boys on how to tackle and run both ways.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Absolutely, but again... Umpires makes mistakes. Always have, always will.

Correct, which is why I think eliminating the need to make contentious judgement calls is the way forward, as it minimises mistakes. We obviously can't get rid of umpire judgement in its entirety, but we could have controls for the most obvious issues. This is why I'm in favour of eliminating prior opportunity before calling holding the ball (as is Pav), because it's frequently a point of disagreement, and impossible for any human being to always get it right.

Of course we can't eliminate every rule that requires a judgement call, but there are other options to address them. Technology exists and we should use it, as long as we learn from the experiences other sports have had with it.

In soccer, VAR has caused more controversy than it's solved, because it's just shifted a judgement call from one human being to another. However, what's less problematic is goal mouth technology, which beeps the referee's watch when the chip inside the ball is detected to have crossed the goal line.

I wonder if the GPS tracker each player is fitted with can be used in real time to determine if a player has run too long with the ball through a similar instant notification to the umpires.

Seems to me making it 15 steps instead of 15 metres simplifies it for everyone. Impossible for umpires to accurately judge 15m constantly given everyone has different stride lengths etc. Set up to fail.

I think you've identified the right problem but the wrong solution. Yes, umpires can't accurately judge 15m, but neither can they judge the number of steps in real time. This is where technology should be used to automatically assess it. If the GPS tracking data can't be used in real time accurately as I suggested above, then cameras with AI can surely do a better job of assessing either distance of the number of strides.

 

[Kernel Kurtz]

Agreed. The mistake is they don't call it all the time. I'm a big advocate in actuallay applying the rules that have been laid down, rather than ignoring/downplaying some because their bosses want the game to flow. I still maintain more free kicks would open the game up more.

Definitly stops the rolling mauls.
But throws , dropping the ball cold are not pulled up , so the maul continues.
Thanfully we don't really play that way.