SA Footy

Corona Man wrote:

bennymacca wrote:Jenkins >>> Dixon

Benny’s back. Was beginning to think you’d lost your password.

Working hard instead of hardly working

I bag him as much as anyone but:

2nd showdown in a row ken has embarrassed himself post game

MW wrote:2nd showdown in a row ken has embarrassed himself post game

yeah he should have acknowledged it was a great game more, other than just whinge about that score review.

amber_fluid wrote:

MW wrote:2nd showdown in a row ken has embarrassed himself post game

yeah he should have acknowledged it was a great game more, other than just whinge about that score review.

And will probably get a please explain from the afl I would've thought.
Great result though.

After watching Ken Hinkley’s press conference, he is absolutely spot on in regard to the goal review system. I have thought for some time if the AFL aren’t willing to spend the money to get the correct technology than they should get rid of it. With the vision last night I can’t tell if it hit the post or not.
Stop worrying about changing the rules, spend the money to stop incidents like last night and plenty that has happened in the past because of this flawed system.

MW wrote:2nd showdown in a row ken has embarrassed himself post game

Don’t agree.. he was spot on.. he also mentioned it didn’t cost them the game and were beaten in key areas of the game

woodublieve12 wrote:

MW wrote:2nd showdown in a row ken has embarrassed himself post game

Don’t agree.. he was spot on.. he also mentioned it didn’t cost them the game and were beaten in key areas of the game

But it did cost them the game because if it was called a point they win.
More like, one of many key moments Port lost.

woodublieve12 wrote:

MW wrote:2nd showdown in a row ken has embarrassed himself post game

Don’t agree.. he was spot on.. he also mentioned it didn’t cost them the game and were beaten in key areas of the game

But what point is he trying to prove on this occasion? The footage was inconclusive which means it’s a goal anyway as the goal umpire called it a goal initially. Why would you blow up after the game about it? You could review free kicks every game and it would effect the result each week. I just don’t see what the issue here is? Maybe he should have pressed “umpires call” but it’s still a goal. It’s not a howler, the only person on the ground that thought it may have hit the post was Jenkins himself.

Ollie Wines embarrassing miss just earlier that would have killed the game cost Port the game. EOS. The goal/point is subjective depending on what side you follow and are not vision impair. Kens embarrassing press conference is another. If he roles were reversed he would have said he was unsighted which he was. JJ should not have just said he was not sure. (grandma would understand)

I actually rate JJs honesty. Why go the political line always

I heard the Jenkins interview and I'm fairly sure he said he was concerned it might have hit the post, not that it had.
The review replay didn't show anything definite, which is why it remained "Umpire's call".

Perhaps we can simplify it to avoid controversy and arguments over replays, and the "we wuz robbed" scenario, and say that if it touches the post but goes through the goal side it is still a goal, if it touches the post and goes through the behind side its a behind, and if it bounces off the post into play its still in play.

Brodlach wrote:I actually rate JJs honesty. Why go the political line always

I agree.

Psyber wrote:I heard the Jenkins interview and I'm fairly sure he said he was concerned it might have hit the post, not that it had.
The review replay didn't show anything definite, which is why it remained "Umpire's call".

Perhaps we can simplify it to avoid controversy and arguments over replays, and the "we wuz robbed" scenario, and say that if it touches the post but goes through the goal side it is still a goal, if it touches the post and goes through the behind side its a behind, and if it bounces off the post into play its still in play.

If Ollie Wines doesn’t try that around the corner shot on goal we don’t have the JJ situation.

Spargo wrote:

JK wrote:might chuck $$ on the draw

Great minds...
I’ve had $10 on the draw on all games except GWS/Car, Melb/GC & WC/Freo
Odds of $51 through to $76.

Five of the six games decided by 4 points or less.
We weren’t far off, mate...

Hinkley saying the review system is rubbish is one thing (it is); basically calling Jenkins a cheat because he didn’t rush up and overrule an umpire that was 2m away is pretty poor

Do you expect anything different from him or his media throng going off all morning? Makes the win more enjoyable

Speaking of media, has there been any fallout of the PAFC twitter post that Jarad Polec wants out from about 3 weeks ago?

MW wrote:Do you expect anything different from him or his media throng going off all morning? Makes the win more enjoyable

Hinkley needs to shut up and take the loss on the chin.
He’s embarrassing himself and his club.

Just watching the replay on Foxtel now, JJ was held twice by Hombsch when chasing for that ball anyway. Should have been a free kick