Video Goal Umpire - which is the preferred outcome?
Ron
Scenario 1:
Video Umpire used:
Two minutes to go:
Scores level:
Caringbush kicks for goal. Ball grazes the inside of the post. Goal
umpire is unsighted: signals a goal. Caringbush lead by 6 points.
Video umpire overrules. Caringbush awarded a behind. Caringbush leads by
a point.
Fuschias kick in. Caringbush cuts off kick in on the 50 metre arc. A
prodigious torpedo puts the ball through for a goal. Caringbush leads by
7 points.
Ball is bounced in the centre. Fuschias drive the ball to full forward.
Fuschia's resting ruckman marks and kicks a goal. Caringbush leads by a
point.
Ball is bounced in the centre. Siren goes. Caringbush wins the flag by 1
point because of the 7 point play which ensued from the overrule of the
goal umpire's error by the video umpire.
Scenario 2:
Video Umpire not used:
Two minutes to go:
Scores level:
Caringbush kicks for goal. Ball grazes the inside of the post. Goal
umpire is unsighted: signals a goal. Caringbush lead by 6 points.
Despite the protest of the Fuschia's players, the error is not
overruled. The Fuschias will need to score twice to win.
Ball is bounced in the centre. Fuschias drive the ball to full forward.
Fuschia's resting ruckman drags the Caringbush fullback to the ground by
the guernsey. The Caringbush force the ball through for a behind.
Caringbush leads by 5 points.
The Caringbush fullback wishes to maintain the two kick advantage. He
whinges to the field umpire for a free kick which would cancel the point
just awarded to the Fuschias. He raises two fingers to indicate that it
was the umpire's second mistake. The field umpire interprets the gesture
as "umpire abuse" and awards a free kick to the Fuschias at the top of
the goal square. The Fuschias kick truly for a goal. The Fuschias lead
by a point.
Ball is bounced in the centre. Siren goes. Fuschias win the flag by 1
point because of the 7 point play which followed the error by the goal
umpire but which was not overruled.
Which is the preferred outcome?
Mister Biggus
coops
"Mister Biggus" <_b0...@gmale.kom> wrote in message
news:uc6ed5dd9r4elu2th...@4ax.com...
> Look what its done to NRL - its slower than that shit american game.
But they get the decisions right - and at the end of the day, that is what
people want. Besides we have the farcical situation anyway where television
goes to an ad and the game doesn't restart until they come back - that time
could be used to look at the replay.
And there have been games where the VR hasn't been used.
David Clayton
> "Mister Biggus" <_b0...@gmale.kom> wrote in message
> news:uc6ed5dd9r4elu2th...@4ax.com...
>> Look what its done to NRL - its slower than that shit american game.
>
> But they get the decisions right - and at the end of the day, that is
> what people want. Besides we have the farcical situation anyway where
> television goes to an ad and the game doesn't restart until they come
> back - that time could be used to look at the replay.
>
Yeah - we could also make it two minutes after each goal to review any
paid/missed free kicks leading up to the score just to make absolutely
sure that no "mistakes" were made that may affect the result. The TV
broadcasters will love that extra time to play ads.
Who else remembers when Australian Football played at AFL level was a
free-flowing game not totally controlled by TV?
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
Woofdog
"David Clayton" <dcs...@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2009.10.17....@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com...
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:17:12 +0000, coops wrote:
>
>
>> "Mister Biggus" <_b0...@gmale.kom> wrote in message
>> news:uc6ed5dd9r4elu2th...@4ax.com...
>>> Look what its done to NRL - its slower than that shit american game.
>>
>> But they get the decisions right - and at the end of the day, that is
>> what people want. Besides we have the farcical situation anyway where
>> television goes to an ad and the game doesn't restart until they come
>> back - that time could be used to look at the replay.
>>
> Yeah - we could also make it two minutes after each goal to review any
> paid/missed free kicks leading up to the score just to make absolutely
> sure that no "mistakes" were made that may affect the result. The TV
> broadcasters will love that extra time to play ads.
>
> Who else remembers when Australian Football played at AFL level was a
> free-flowing game not totally controlled by TV?
>
I've only been here since '76. But, David, totally agree. There should be no
break between goals just get on with the game. It is ludicrous that the
officials have to WAIT FOT TV AUTHORISATION before they can restart play.
What this does, it to give tv a level of control over the game, which is
unjust. Bugger the US, they started it. And I do recall when a game of WAFL
at the WACA was cut short because of tv commitments, which totally
inappropriate.
Eddie
Mister Biggus
yesteryear on foxtel!!!
David Clayton
> "David Clayton" <dcs...@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>> Who else remembers when Australian Football played at AFL level was a
>> free-flowing game not totally controlled by TV?
>>
> I've only been here since '76. But, David, totally agree. There should be
> no break between goals just get on with the game. It is ludicrous that the
> play. What this does, it to give tv a level of control over the game,
> which is unjust. Bugger the US, they started it. And I do recall when a
> game of WAFL at the WACA was cut short because of tv commitments, which
> totally inappropriate.
I tell ya what, for all the criticism that soccer gets for slow play, low
scoring etc. the one thing that they have NOT done is sell out to TV
interests by having breaks in play.
They even start World Cup matches exactly on the hour (IIRC), so TV
viewers have to tune in on the controlling body's timetable, no some
money-grubbing TV networks.
Just look at the crippling financial state major soccer competitions are
in because they have refused to have their game corrupted to the
same level of other football codes.......
Woofdog
> On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:16:54 +0800, Woofdog wrote:
>
>> "David Clayton" <dcs...@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
> .......
>>> Who else remembers when Australian Football played at AFL level was a
>>> free-flowing game not totally controlled by TV?
>>>
>> I've only been here since '76. But, David, totally agree. There should be
>> no break between goals just get on with the game. It is ludicrous that
>> the
>> officials have to WAIT FOR TV AUTHORISATION before they can restart
>> play. What this does, it to give tv a level of control over the game,
>> which is unjust. Bugger the US, they started it. And I do recall when a
>> game of WAFL at the WACA was cut short because of tv commitments, which
>> totally inappropriate.
>
> I tell ya what, for all the criticism that soccer gets for slow play, low
> scoring etc. the one thing that they have NOT done is sell out to TV
> interests by having breaks in play.
No, they haven't in most countries, but the tv staitions try and throw in
ads DURING play! But with the advent of 6-year olds in the control room, the
volume of action replays is now so high that we MISS live action whilst we
are forced to watch RECORDED action!
I again recall that in the US they tried to force the officials into not
restarting play at throw-ins, until ad breaks were over.
Eddie