The AFL Review Centre (ARC) has come under intense scrutiny for not intervening with a contentious free kick during the last quarter of Geelong’s eight-point win over Adelaide on Thursday night.
Having played catch-up with the Cats all night, Matthew Nicks’ Crows trailed by just two points halfway through the final term and looked a live chance of an unlikely win.
Watch every match of every round of the Premiership Season LIVE and ad-break free during play on FOX FOOTY, available on Kayo Sports | New to Kayo? Join now and get your first month for just $1.
However, what on first glance looked like an innocuous free kick in favour of the home side with the new ‘last touch’ rule, in fact should have been paid against them.
Adelaide young gun Zac Taylor was penalised with the umpire believing the ball came off his boot and not that of Geelong stalwart Tom Atkins, where replays clearly showed last contact was with the latter.
Taylor was evidently displeased at the umpire’s decision to penalise him, with the free kick playing a large part in the home side kicking a goal moments later via Jack Martin.
The Cats were the far better side at GMHBA Stadium as they continued their 23-year unbeaten streak against Adelaide at the home ground, however the ARC’s decision to not quickly review the incident raised eyebrows in the Fox Footy box — given their decision earlier in the night to do so with a close call.
“We’re under the impression that it gets reviewed upstairs, and it can be corrected or overturned as the first one was. So, why wasn’t the second?” two-time North Melbourne premiership player David King began post-game.
“It was a clear and obvious kick off the boot of Atkins. I don’t know why the first one was paid that way, but certainly the second one was obviously and clearly off the boot of Atkins — who stooged the umpire beautifully.
“He did exactly what he was supposed to do … it comes off the left boot of Atkins, and charges over to say: ‘That’s my ball’. In the end, he outsmarted the men in green.”
Three-time premiership Tiger Jack Riewoldt added: “I think we’d all be happy if the first one was left the way it was, and that one is just ‘play on’. I don’t know whether we have to get into the minuscule detail of looking at it to the enth degree. But, if you’re going to look at the first one, they have to look at the second.
“They completely missed it there, the ARC, in what was a pretty pivotal moment. In the end, there’s a few moments you could say: ‘This may’ve gone Adelaide’s way’.”
When asked by journalists in his post-game press conference about the decision, Nicks was adamant it did not play a critical role in deciding the result.
King ended by saying: “If we’re going to be able to review these things chasing perfection, then that’s across the board. You can’t miss like that … the game had stopped, so there was enough time if the ARC was on the ball.
“It’s a stretch to say that cost them the goal, but it certainly gave them the opportunity.”