Gerard Whateley has criticised the AFL for its handling of Nick Watson’s disallowed goal, believing umpires have been inconsistent regarding players stepping off the line for a shot on goal.

On Thursday, Watson appeared to kick a goal after the halftime siren to extend the Hawks’ lead over the Saints to 56 points.

Instead, the goal was disallowed by the umpire who deemed the small forward had deviated from his line and didn’t kick the ball over the man on the mark.

While the call had no ramifications on the match, with Hawthorn winning by 52 points, there was plenty of criticism regarding the decision, with the Hawks seeking further clarification on the ruling post-match and Kane Cornes saying it was the dumbest decision he'd seen this year.

Whateley, on SEN's Crunch Time shared a similar view, pointing to a similar situation in the Round 6 clash between Collingwood and Carlton.

In that match, Carlton's Talor Byrne had a set shot after the final siren with the Blues six points down.

While the rookie ended up missing the shot to the left, confirming their loss, Whateley noted that he'd had similarly run off his mark, but his score was allowed to count seeing the final score read 88-83.

This would lead Whateley to ask who in the AFL's umpires department though they were fooling with this inconsistency in calls.

“I would just encourage you this morning to go back and watch Talor Byrne's shot after the siren at the end of the round six game (between) Carlton and Collingwood,” Whateley said.

“Talor Byrne neither veers, curves, hooks, nor improves the angle. He comes in on a straight line, but the axis is ever so slightly off, so his trigonometry's just a bit off.

“But he stays on a straight line, he doesn't kick over the mark, and he misses.

“We all know that that's fine. That's the way that the law has been implemented.

“That's actually the spirit of the law. Don't veer, curve, (or) hook; don't improve the angle, but come in on a straight line, and the umpire will be fine.

“And then the problem with what happens, and again it never happens in isolation, is Nick Watson is adjudged to have done (and)  I challenge you, it's exactly the same thing as Talor Byrne.

“The umpire on the spot decides he needs to intervene and strike it out.

“The problem is the umpire's department, who I honestly don't know who they think they're fooling, cos it's not anyone who watches a lot of footy, goes, ‘No, that's the correct call’.

“So, if Watson is right, Byrne is wrong.

“And this is the whole problem, the next player who lines up on a shot at goal and the next umpire who's there goes, ‘Well, which one am I supposed to do?’

“Am I supposed to be bound by the way I've always umpired this, or am I supposed to be literally bound by the nonsense that was put out instead of accepting responsibility?”