Is the AFL Goal Video Review Working?

With two posters given goals in recent AFL Grand Finals - Tom Hawkins 2009 and Sharrod Wellingham 2011 - the AFL had to do something. And after much debate, a video review was decided as the solution for the 2012 season.  But is it the best one? Not only as far as accuracy, but cost, and interruption to the game.

FIFA's micro chip trial

In years gone by Dean laidley, as coach of the Kangaroos, suggested a micro chip be inserted in the ball. Presumably the technology would detect if the ball had fully crossed the goal line, similar to what FIFA have been investigating for the EPL since 2005. In AFL it would also have to work when kicked above goal and point posts to adjudicate correct scoring decisions. FIFA still have not come up with a satisfactory solution. Not only is it technologically challenging, it is cost-prohibitive at this stage.  This method is also wide open to hackers. What is stopping GWS or the Suns players recruiting their high school hacker buddies to intercept the chip's message and have a lesser score reconfigured to a major before it reaches the ears of the umpie?  It is obvious technology is fraught with danger.

A few years back I wrote to the AFL and the Herald Sun, recommending a technology-free method, using nets on either side of the goal posts to determine whether a goal or point was scored.

If there was a close decision about which side of the goal post the ball went, the evidence would be there for all to see because the net would capture the ball on one side or the other.  The benefits?

• No need for video review. 
• The result is immediate, there are no interruptions to the game. 
• Extremely low cost.  The nets can be purchased 2nd hand from the local fishing community, or the fishnet stockings from StKilda's end of season review can be sewn together.  

In the off-season, the umpires, led by the Geisch, can use the nets trawling for Great Whites on Port Phillip Bay. This would develop the necessary character to umpire at AFL level.

Umpire Shane McInerney putting in the hard yards pre-season.

While the Herlald Sun published my original letter (they published everybody's back then), Andrew Demetriou and Adrian Anderson were conspicuous in their silence.

So, today I have returned to cover the weaknesses in my proposal.  The missing pieces to solving the puzzle of ensuring 100% correct, fool proof AFL goal umpiring decisons.

The weaknesses in my original solution were obviously what happens...

1. when the ball is kicked above the posts, and hence, above the nets
2. if the ball glances the post, but is unseen by the umpire
3. when it is touched on the line by a player.

Billy Brownless. Yes this has nothing
to do with the Mirroul Silo Kick

Firstly, the minimum height of the goal and point posts would be extended to 10 metres higher than a wheat silo. This metric is scientifically calibrated by Billy Brownless, who won the inaugural Mirroul Silo Kick in the Riverina in 1992, booting a ball over a wheat silo by just less than that margin. Following this to its logical conclusion, no current player could kick as big as Billy, so it stands to reason that they couldnt kick it any higher when having a shot on goal.  The height of the sticks would play havoc with Richo's goal-kicking, the width between them becoming exceedingly narrow via optical illusion, but as he's retired it's a moot point.

Weakness #1 - solved.

There are a couple of options to determine if the ball has glanced a post. One is to coat goal and point posts in fingerprint powder.  There'd be a bloody great smudge on the post for all to see.

The other option is to create all goal and point posts as one giant car horn, or Klaxon. The slightest force would trigger a sound. Distinctive ringtones can be used for point posts and goal posts. In fact, goal umpires might like to choose their own ring tone to bring a bit of personality into the game. Something like a Dukes of Hazard car horn for the goal post, and Abba's Dancing Queen might suffice for the point post.

It would be far more effective to use both methods in tandem to prevent players secretly pressing the goal post on close shots.

Weakness #2 - solved.

Finally, determining whether a player has touched the ball before or after it crosses the goal line is a little bit more difficult to judge without using technology.  Here, I've opted for the Stick Vs Carrot method, and gone for the stick. And it does rely on the existing camera set up, initially. The steps to the method are as follows:

• Electrodes are connected to the goal umpires groin prior to taking the field.
• If on the replay it has been determined that a mistake has been made, a small electronic charge is sent by the Geisch sitting up high in the box, by pressing a button.
• For repeat offenders, the charge is increased.
• Substitute goal umps are at the ready should the charge become too much for the officiating umpire
• Eventually, the cameras are phased out as the goal umpies are that motivated to avoid the consequences they will never make another mistake ever again.

Umpire preparing for a game

This method works equally well for male and female umpires, along the lines of  Pavlov's Dog psychological training. It's only weakness is that the Geisch might begin to enjoy it a little too much.

Regardless, that is weakness #3 - solved, and an accurate, cost-acceptable solution to ensure 100% goal umpiring accuracy with minimal interruption to the game.

Messers Demetriou and Anderson, I await your response.